CAPTAIN CAMPBELL – WALKER’S LECTURE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 4989, 20 March 1877, Page 3

CAPTAIN CAMPBELL - WALKER’S LECTURE.

; (Concluded.) -I do, not think that any damage has as yet been done to the climate of New Zealand, or its water supply by the clearing of forests; indeed, I have little doubt that the climate has in many instances been ameliorated by it. Some of my friends tell me that this city of Wellington is a case in point. But they also tell me that there is much less water iu the streams .which run down from the surrounding hills than formerly. I know naturally nothing as to the facts myself, and am inclined, as already stated, to take such, expressions of opinion with a very large grain of salt. In the present case the opinions are exactly in unison with what I should have surmised from what I see, and I take the drying up of the streams as a warning to be wise in time,'and not to kill the goose, i.e., the forest, which lays the golden eggs, i.e., moisture and water supply—a burning question by the way, I believe, at the present time in Wellington. I may say the same of the West Coast of the South Island, from which I have just returned. No damage has as yet been done, rather the contrary ; but ascending the narrow valleys of the Grey and Duller rivers and their tributaries, walled iu by steep forest-clad bills, a feeling almost of dread constantly presented itself to my mind as to what would be the rc-

suit if these forests were ever to be cleared away without great.'discrimination and there--teution of extensive reserves. Mr. Kirk was with me, and can tell you that the same thought presented itself to both of us almost simultaneous y These forests are of little commercial value, but I am certain we cannot be too careful of how they are felled and treated. Once gone farewell to the smiling fields in the valleys below and abundant pasture on the lower slopes of the hills. There is but little soil or vegetable deposit on the top of the shingle—l do not know the exact geological term for it—of which those mountains are mainly composed. Remove the forest, and the coating of humus, or vegetable mould, will soon follow, perhaps after it has afforded pasturage for a few sheep for a few years, and the after results will be those which I have attempted briefly to depict in the case of the French Alps and Pyrenees. The same argument of course holds good more or less with regard to all the forest-clad mountain ranges iu New Zealand. I say nothing of the actual raiufall, although the faett, as I have seen and compared them in this colony, almost convince me that forests have a direct influence even on the amount of that; for all along the East Coast, with bare plains and comparatively little timber on the hills, we have but a scanty rainfall even in the immediate neighborhood of the hills themselves, whereas in the densely wooded West Coast we have a rainfall greatly in excess of the average. The forests may, as has been asserted elsewhere, be the effect and not the cause ; but I must say I for one see nothing to lead us to that belief, as if it be so why should not rain have fallen and forests been created on the eastern slopes of the mountains, on which the clouds laden with moisture from the Pacific first impinge ? Be this as it may, I have no hesitation in advocating the careful conservancy of the forests on the western slopes of the mountains, which may be called the backbone of New Zealand, and I have no doubt that the formation of plantations in Otago, Canterbury, and eventually probably iu some of the eastern districts of the North Island, will go a great way to ameliorating the climate, breaking the force of the wind—an advantage of planting which has almost escaped my notice, but which is matter of great importance, especially when the wind is a hot one, as it sometimes is iu the Canterbury plains, and decreasing excessive evaporation and consequent dryness of soil. In short, I am well assured that by the initiation and systematic treatment of forest conservancy and planting New Zealand may secure her proud pre-eminence as the best watered and probably most salubrious climate in the Southern hemisphere, if not in the world. Let us now consider the financial aspect of the question. The question of direct financial gain, or extracting a revenue from the forests by the State, should ever be subordinate to their conservancy for climatic considerations and improvement, to meet the demands of the future. So lo‘ g as this is borne in mind, and we are not tempted to overdraw and trench on the capital as well as the income of our forests iu the shape of timber and minor produce, there is no reason why they should not be dealt with like any other property, nor why the State as proprietor in trust for the public should not derive from them the maximum amount of revenue compatible with the general welfare of the people. The financial aspect forms always an important itein for consideration in the conduct of our affairs, whether public or private, and at present the financial question is, I may say, paramount with the Government and people of New Zealand. I am not, therefore, surprised at the general satisfaction with which the public Press has received my statement at Dunedm that the Forest Department should be entirely self-supporting, though I am surprised that it should never have struck; people before that this cjuild be done, as it has been done in other countries. I have no hesitation in reiterating the Dunedin statement, and proceed to explain how it is’to be clone. We cannot, of course, maintain a department for the selection of reserves and their improvement, supervision of unreserved forests, forming plantations, &c., without money; but we may, I think, get that money from sources hitherto untapped, in short, by disposing of our surplus property, which we do not want, and which is much better in other hands, to the best advantage. No one in his senses would propose to reserve and keep permanently locked up, either for climatic considerations or prospective money value, one tithe of the forests of this colony as they now exist. Time and careful explorations and selections on a definite system can alone show what we should keep, and what may be parted with ; but I may say broadly that probably nine-tenths of the existing area under forest in New Zealand may in time be cleared away, or at least not specially reserved, and devoted to the growth of timber. I propose that Government, i.e., the public, should claimand take a fair share of the, value of the timber remaining on the waste lands of the colony, and not allow it, as has been almost universal heretofore, to be monopolised solely for the benefit of individuals, or still worse, wasted and destroyed. I do not, let it be well understood, advocate for a moment injurious restrictions on settlement, or withholding bush land not Suitable for reserves from sale and occupation. To do so would be to put a stop in some districts almost entirely to the progress of the country ; but I do say that whilst we are selecting the reserves (a matter which will take some time'), and subsequently with regard to the margin left as unreserved, a system may, without inconvenience, be introduced and worked, under which forest officers shall be consulted by the Waste Lands Boards with regard to the portion of the forests to be thrown open for settlement from time to time with a view to opening out gradually, and first as much as possible in places where the timber has a marketable value. And the waste land may therefore reasonably command a higher price on account of the timber standing on it, instead of as now,particularly in this province of Wellington, being sacrificed along with thousands of pounds worth of timber at a mere nominal rate in order to attract a few settlers. I say boldly that this system of pushing settlement in localities not ripe for it, and in a colony where there is still plenty of room for settlers, and sacrificing very valuable property in so doing, does not commend itself to me at all as being really for the best interests of the colony, and I hope and believe that if am rightly understood the Government and popular feeling will agree with me. If so, we should, by throwing open for settlement from time to time portions of the waste forest lands of the Crown, secure a price for the timber, or enhanced price for the land, which comes to the. same thing, : with the further indirect advantage that purchasers would probably set a higher value on the trees, and utilize not destroy those of economic value. So much for the actual disposal of forest lands not- suited for reserves, and required for extension of settlement. I propose also to lease out to sawmillers blocks of the Government forest, not at present the reserves, to be worked on payment of a royalty or tithe of so much per. 100 ft., and to require all parties indenting on the Government forests for building or fencing stuff, firewood, &c., to take out licenses on payment of seignorage or royalty, and fell, split, and remove what they require in certain places, to be prescribed from time to time, and not at will, I would-make absolutely no exceptions to this rule. All should pay—squatter, miner, free-selector, &o. Everyone requiring timber from a Government forest should pay for it; but I would make such payment very light, and do everything in our power to save inconvenience and unnecessary interference, by the issue of annual licenses for firewood, upkeep of post and rail fences, &c,, and especially iu the case of squatters and farmers cutting on their own leasehold or neighboring Crown forests. As regards the trade more particularly, our object would be to induce sawmillers to first enter on and work blocks of forest adjoining settlements. When they had taken all that they could profitably work up, give them new blocks further in, and allow the splitter and firewood-chopper to take what they can off the first block before its outright sale. This system has been tried i» Southland to a certain extent, and as an experiment I consider successfully. The Waste Lauds Board in that district have withdrawn from sale all the forests, which are extensive, and find no difficulty in getting sawmillers to work blocks ou payment of royalty, or in collecting license

fees, though the means at their disposal, consisting only of one inspector,, are very iiiade* quate. In Otago they are leasing to sawmills at so much per annum, averaging £1 per acre per annum for three years, and issuing, licenses to hand-sawyers and splitters at 50s. per annum for a claim of 200 ft. square. In Westland, again, a fee of £5 for each man employed in working a Government forest is charged ; and I believe in a fee of £5 was charged for working a certain area of forest; but this has now been put a stop to. The Southland system recommends itself iu every way, and appears to give satisfaction to sawmillers and those requiring timber generally. The present Government revenue, even' at the very low royalty of 3d. per 100 from sawmills, £2 settler’s license for cutting firewood for domestic use, Is. per cord firewood for sale, aud 20s, per 000 pieces of fencing stuff, amounts to about £I2OO a year. But the sawmill industry is at present very stagnant, and there is doubtless great evasion or non-enforcement of the license regulations by settlers and splitters owing to want of establishment or arrangement for their systematic working and supervision. There are regulations intended to prevent waste aud restrict, felling within certain limits ; but these cannot be said to have been enforced, nor should I try to do so hurriedly. It is only by degrees, as we can help sawmillers to a better market for their small stuff, induce them to work out one block before going to another, ami ensure economy in hand-sawing or splitting by levying royalty at so much a tree or number of trees, that we can hope to prevent waste and regulate felling. But it can be done by degrees and taking the people along with us. Surely something in this direction, by which a forest revenue already amounting to upwards of £2OOO a year in Otago aud Southland, an amount which would probably be doubled the moment systematic supervision was introduced, whilst it gives us the means of gradually introducing improved management, is better than the laisscz oiler and general destruction of timber iu other districts without any return direct or indirect to the State, or to disposing of forest lands, worth £3O per acre for the forest alone, at £2. It may be said that people will not buy forest land at enhanced rates, and will not pay .to take timber from Government forest when they can get it from freehold. I maintain that they will gladly pay enhanced rates for forest land if we place it judiciously on the market, and not depreciate it by sacrificing the timber on it in order to push settlement, aud that Government would have no objection to the supply being drawn from freehold lauds, aud can well afford to wait till they are exhausted. I know all the stock arguments as to the cost of clearing forest land, the advantages of opening out the country, which no one,can deny ; and the fact that timber is absolutely valueless and an encumbrance away from a market. I grant them all; but if the forest land be not worth clearing, it had better remain uncleared till it is, at least till we have selected the reserves. If timber laud is worth having, an extra £1 per acre will not prevent its being taken up. And if the timber be absolutely valueless now from its situation and want of means of communication and transport, there is no reason that it should be so ten years hence. And I submit that the colony can well afford te wait, and not force on the clearing of any more forest land, pending the selection of the reserves, and development of the Public Works policy. I repeat then my expression of opinion, that whatever may have been advisable in the past it will be well to be circumspect in dealing with the area remaining as forest Crown lauds, which may be approximately stated at 12.000. of acres out of a total area of 66.000. of acres ; and that whilst the permanent reserves are being selected the tracts net required for that purpose be sold or leased ■with care and to the best advantage, and not indiscriminately or without any reference to the value of timber upon them. Outright sale commends itself iu a colony like this, where we; do not wish to conserve or reproduce the crop; but I would not sell an acre except at a much higher price than is now generally obtained; failing which I should lease to sawmillers, devote to felling for hand-sawyers and splitters, or include in pastoral leases under certain restrictions, as found most ad vantageous, I believe by the adoption of such measures as I have thus sketched out we shall secure a very considerable and increasing forest revenue, sufficient to balance all our expenditure and form plantations, whilst the reserved area is nursed and by degrees treated on principles of scientific forestry, with a view to increasing its yield per acre, and improving the growth of .timber on it where it is not simply retained for climatic considerations and is too remote or inaccessible to work. The increased forest will yield our tor the present, and the reserves and plantations which we constitute and improve from that revenue will well recoup us in the future. It may be argued that this is but taxation in another form, and not at all’what was expected when I said that the department would be self-supporting. If paying for what does not belong to me be a form of taxation, I admit that it is so ; but I cannot see that anyone has any more right to take the forest products from the Crown—that is, public lands held in trust by the Government of the day—than he has from yours er mine, and think it will be admitted on all hands that Government have a right to charge him for them as you or I would. I believe there will be some difficulty with regard to miners, who consider that their £1 miners’ right gives them a claim to use the wood they require free of any further payment ; and of course if this right or privilege has been conceded to them, it must be respected. But I would rather advocate the withdrawal of the special tax upon him and let him pay for his wood like anyone else, as I cannot see that it is right or fair that the Westland or Nelson miner should get timber free for his £l, whilst the Otago miner gets none, and the Thames miner has to pay 255. for each kauri tree, which I believe goes to the natives. I have found that if all have to pay none complain .or have a. grievance, and there is nothing we should more carefully avoid or guard against than the creation of special rights or privileges—our special bugbear in India. Before concluding, I should like to place before you very briefly some of the financial results of State forestry in India and elsewhere. Forest conservancy in. India by a State or Government department dates from about twenty years ago. The department, from very small beginnings, originating in many provinces in the mere appointment of a few forest guards to protect certain trees, and the establishment of a few small nurseries and plantations, has gradually taken charge of a very large public estate/ consisting of forests all more or less deteriorated to an extent of which you in New Zealand can have no idea, devastated yearly by fire, overrun by countless numbers of cattle and sheep, whose herds considered they had a right to cut down any tree from mere wantonness, or to allow their beasts to feed on the leaves, and encumbered with the rights and privileges of a native population of over 200,000,000. Not a promising property to tackle and improve, still less to exact an annua! surplus from. Still it has been done, and by the last returns for the whole of India, which I have with me, viz,, those for 1873-74, the forest revenue was £700,000, and expenditure £414,000 odd, leaving a surplus of upwards of £2,885,000, or 41 per cent, on the total revenue. Both revenue and expenditure are about double what they were ten years previously, in 1864-65. I do not say that there have not been faults in our Indian forest administration, that vi e may not have looked too much to revenue and too little to real conservancy and improvements, that some of the royalties—that on firewood for instance—may not have pressed hardly on the class of poor cultivators, who pay it when they have no village forest from which to obtain it free. But I do say that whilst there is no doubt that the state of the forests has been and is being improved every day, reserves selected, demarcated, and surveyed, occupying a special branch of the department; plantations on a large scale established, the real rights and even privileges of the people, in the shape of timber for agricultural purposes, grazing, &c., have boon scrupulously and liberally conceded to them ; aud that the manner in which revenue has always balanced aud is now steadily yielding an increased surplus on expenditure

ia most gratifying and encouraging to the forester in all parts of the world. I may add that in the Madras .Presidency, the portion of India with which I have been more immediately connected as regards the Forest Department, the policy of the Government has not been to produce a large surplus balance, but rather to increased liberality in the free grants of timber and liberal concessions to the wants and circumstances of the poorer classes of the inhabitants,' As they write so recently as last December to the Governor of India: “ It has been the policy of this Government (that of Fort St. George)—a policy which has been approved by the Secretary of State—that the production of a surplus is neither the present nor ultimate primary object of forest operations ; and whilst seeking to increase the productive powers and revenues of the forests, this Government has had mainly in view the utilisation of increasing revenues in extending plantations and in conserving indigenous forests, and by this means supplying the people and railways with cheap fuel, and preserving or restoring those climatic conditions which appear to be more or less dependent upon the existence of woodlands. The aim and object has indeed been to be self-supporting, and, devote any surplus accruing to improvements, which is exactly what I would propose to do here for some years, though the circumstances here are widely different and much more favorable to expectations of a large surplus revenue even in the immediate future. For here we have a large area of almost virgin forest unencumbered by vested rights and privileges, whereas there we had to take over forests which have been more or less worked for, centuries, and which were burdened by the claims, legal or otherwise, of a teeming native establishment, which in many cases more than represented the gross annual yield of the forest. I have spoken in my Dunedin paper of the result of planting operations in India, and do not propose to recapitulate those results this evening. I may state, however, that froin reports received by the last Suez mail I learn that the yield of the eucalyptus plantations on the Nilgeri Hills is far exceeding the moat sanguine expectations. The conservator and a trained forest assistant having made a careful estimate and a series of actual experiments, the former officially reports the yield at 1150 cubic feet or 25 tons (58 cubic feet to the ton) of dry weight per acre per annum, whilst the indigenous forests on the Nilgeris, which have not been conserved, yield only half a ton per acre per annum. This speaks volumes for the financial benefit likely to be derived from planting the eucalypti in some parts of this country, where the climate closely resembles" that of the Nilgeris. I may_ mention that the average out-turn of indigenous New Zealand forests, as stated by sawmillers, does not exceed 15,000 superficial feet i -1250 cubic feet—per acre and then it is presumed to be exhausted for ever, Mr. Kirk and I estimated the proper out-turn in timber in a portion ®f the Seaward Bush, Invercargill, at close on 31,000 superficial feet, say 2500 cubic feet; but it must be remembered that under the present system much timber which w.'iuld be utilised elsewhere is discarded as worthless, and all small stuff is considered utterly valueless. I am in correspondence with the Chief Engineer on the subject Of making use of it for the railway locomotives wherever practicable, and if we can thus find a market for it even at very little over price of actual haulage and sawing into billets, I consider that a great boon will be conferred on the sawmill industry and the colony. Leaving ludia and turning to the Continent of Europe, I find that the annual revenue of the Forest Department in Prussia is £2,100,000, disbursements rather more than half, leaving a net profit of £1,000,000, the disbursements including an item of £76,000 for commutation of forest rights and servi&des. The net profit in Saxony is £219,000; Bavaria, £596,000 ; Austria, £90,000 Hanover, £162,000 ; whilst that of some of the smaller States, for which I have not returns in money, must be much greater in proportion if we take their yield in timber as a guide. I may mention that in Bavaria the proportion of 'forest to total area is 34 - 4 per cent., or upwards of one acre per head of population. This is the largest area, in proportion to total extent or head of population of any State in the German Empire. In the debates on the forest question, in the House of Kepreseatatatives here in 1874, I observe that several members took exception to Sir Julius Vogel’s original Forest Bill, which was subsequently withdrawn on the ground that the conservation of the natural forests, would not pay, judging from the results obtained in Germany, Austria, &c. I do not think that- any. such conclusion can be deduced from'the published;, returns. Not only do they in most cases show a fair rental, amounting in the case of Saxony to 12s. 6d. per acre ; but it must be borne in mind that much of the total area under conservancy on which the rental is calculated is unproductive, only partially stocked, or subject to the free supply of the villagers and their right to pasture their cattle, and collect straw, litter, &c. therein, for which there is no money return. I have seen many instances in' Ger-. many and India in 'Which the; wholeahnual yield of a forest tract went to the inhabitants of neighboring villages free of charge, thereby decreasing very considerably the annual revenue per acre calculated in the total area. We have no such rights and vested interests to lower the money return from the New Zealand foteats ; but it is- true that we have at present 'a limited demand, owing to a sparse population; an evil, if it be.an evil, which, if I may judge from the number of young New Zealanders one sees in every village, is fast remedying itself from natural causes, not to mention the results of immigration. The only point on which I consider we must be very careful is not to hamper the timber industry by vexations regulations, or raise the price of timber to such an extent that it will be cheaper to import from neighboring colonies, Europe, or America. I see no cause at present to fear such a result. The imports it is true are large, their value having been, roughly speaking,;'£lßo,ooo ip 1875;' but the chief items are the eucalypti from Tasmania and Australia; imported for special purposes, and not in competition with New Zealand timbers. The value of New Zealand exports in timber and forest produce almost exactly balances the imports ; but the main item of export is kauri gum (£130,000) on which valuable product the State has hitherto received ‘ little or nothing, I think we should leave out the kauri gum tracts, or waste lands of the Crown, or levy a royalty on the quantity taken from them. I see no reason why New Zealand should import so much timber as she does, when she has such indigenous timbers as kauri, totara, pUriri, black June, and black birch at command. The main reason is doubtless dear labor; but I am sanguine that as population increases, and the real value of the indigenous timber, when to cut and how to season them, becomes known; the imports will decrease nod "increase, whilst the demand for our surplus timber from the West Coast from Australia will be greatly augmented. I think I have now said enough, and only trust that I may have presented the question of forest conservancy to you under a new and highly important aspect, so far as regards its influence on the climate, and that you will endorse the measures I have suggested for its gradual introduction—which are identical with those which I have recommended to your Government—with your approval. ■ His Excellency, after inviting discussion on the paper which was not responded to, said: As no gentleman seems inclined to make any remarks upon the very interesting lecture we have heard, I beg to propose a vote of thanks to Captain Campbell-Walker, and before doing so I should like to make a very few remarks upon it. (Hear, hear.) The question of the climatic influence of forests upon a country I think is one which in this present day few people will be inclined to deny. It is a subject which has attracted very general interest throughout Europe, and in other parts]of the world. It is self-evident that a mountain side divested, of its natural forest covering must be more susceptible to the influence of heavy rains, that the soil which attaches to its sides must be more liable to be washed into the valley beneath than when the mountain side is covered with forest, and. thatf ’the fact of the forest shading the soil from the rays of ; the sun prevents the

more rapid evaporation which occurs when the forest is taken away ; and therefore, it requires, I think, little argument to oblige one to admit that the existence of forests on the land must equalise the evaporation, and- therefore to a great extent regulate the water supply of a country. Till I came into this room and heard the lecture, I was totally unaware of r.he line of thought which Captain Campbell-Walker intended to pursue, and therefore I am not in any way prepared to express any very decided opinion. upon what has emanated from him, and I daresay many others are in the same position ; but at the same time I think you will all agree with me that his lecture from first to last has taken a very practical turn. (Cheers.) He has shown us that the existence of forests has a very decided and a very beneficial influence on climate, and while he has not presented to your view any magnificent scheme of forest regeneration—perhaps I am hardly correct in using that term, for I am happy to say there is no necessity for regenerating forests in New Zealand, but while he has not presented to your view any scheme for forest maintenance at a large Cost to the country, he has told you whatever plan he advises it will have the merit of being self-supporting. I entirely agree with him that it should be so, and I am equally confident that it might be made so, and . that a scheme such as he suggests might be very easily and successfully carried out. I have been accustomed to live in forest countries, and nothing has struck me more than to see the gross way in which forests are abused and wasted. It has been my fortune on various occasions to visit the forest tracts of British North America, and I may say there is no doubt that while there is an enormous amount of very valuable timber annually extracted from those lands, yet there is a very much larger amount annually wasted. Still—l speak subject to correction, for it is some time since f left Canada—l believe the Government derive a considerable revenue from the fore.-t country. In this colony I have constantly been told, “ Oh, in this district the soil is exceedingly good, but it is impossible to settle it, because the forest is so dense nobody can afford to clear it.” That was told me only the other day on the West Coast. Well, if this is the case, I think it becomes self-evident that if before introducing the settler to such laud you can introduce the sawmiller, and so abstract the heavy timber, and further get rid of some of the smaller timber in the shape of firewood, not only will you be doing the intending settler no barm, but you will in fact be enhancing the value of the laud by removing that which checks enterprise. For my own part I must own from the experience I have had in new countries I believe that the settler who can establish himself on forest land—l admit all the difficulties, the loss of time, and the expense of labor to be encountered—will reap a much better reward for his enterprise than will he who takes up land which requires no clearing. As I said before, I was totally unprepared for the line of argument Captain Walker has taken up, and therefore the few remarks I have made are very cursery and superficial. lam sure you will join with me in thanking him heartily for the interesting arid practical lecture which he has delivered.

Thanks were accorded by acclamation, and the meeting then dispersed.