PUMICE LANDS

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 345, 5 October 1932, Page 3

PUMICE LANDS

The Nhtional Expenditure Comrriission, in dealink VvitH the der velopment aiid 'settleilieht ,bf pumice land iti the Rotbrua district, has hiisrepiesented the positlbn in a hiapner which is defiiiitely" prejudicial to the progress bf the district and further pumice land settleirient. The commiseibn ajipareritly has based its conclusiohs upon the costs of bringing land into cultlvation under various of the Maori land settlement sche.mes in the Rotorua "district. . These costs, the commission claims, are in the vicinity of £20 an acre and are burdened with a particularly heavy maintenance cost over the first years after coming into production. On the basis of • these figures, the commission expresses the opinion that "it is difhcult to justify development at such cost, and if pumice lands cannot be brought into permanent pastnre at a mbre reasonable price, then they woulcl be b'etter-left iii their riatural state until the finances of the Dominion are in a mofe -'ibuoyant condition." We agree with the commission that it is difficult tb justify the settlement of pumice land at the figure mentioned, biit the figtire i itself is entirely exaggerated. It may apply to native land settlement in so'me areas, bilt it most certainly does not apply to average develbpment costs in this district. In to-day's issue, we publish the views bf the MayoT, Mr. T. Jackson, and Mr. E. Earle Vaile on the subject. Both bf these gentlemen are practical farmefs with wide experiehce of farming conditions in this district; they have successfully farmed pumice land from the rough, and both definitely assert that the figure qiioted b'y the commission is out of all proportion to actual costs. Seven pounds an acre, they state is ,a figure much riearer the mark. There will possibly be some divergence of opinion upon the actual figure, but practical farhiers in the district will generally place developmeiit costs at quite fifty per cent. less than the figure given by the commission. Mr. Vaile quotes the finding of the delegation bf Waikato farmers and. businessmen who toured the district in 1930, and points out that these gentlemen as farmers with a practical knowledge of the farming necessities of pumice land, are much more fitted to express an opinion on the subject than the members of the National Expenditure Commission. An investigating eom-

mittee of the commission spent a sho'ft time in Rotorua before the compilatibn Of the report but so far as we afe aware; did not irispect district farming properties or take any evidence on the question. Its views appareritly were formed as a rbsult bf ah obviously cursory survey of the Maori settlement schemes and an exahimatibn of their accounts. With due regard for the ability of the several members of the comniissioh, it is ObvidUs that iii this case they are outside their province and have arrived at an entirely erroneous decisibn with regard to the po'ssibilities of pumice land' farming, The growing production and ctiltivatibn in the district are direct evideiice in rebuttal of their views. A careful and competent examination of tHe positiBri, wo'iild definitely disprove the. assiimptibns of the cbinmissibii. ..They recpmmend tKe cessatibn df land settlement over what is the iarg- . est undevelopecl , arba iii Hew Zealand. Properiy developed by practical fariheis; a lB,fge portion of this area has great pr odiictive potentialities and in recommending the jettisoning of this futtire; on entirely false premises, ihe commission has cominitted a gmye hliinlief: It is tb be "hoped that thb iGovernment, in -fthis matter, >will. not be guided^bv the cbmmissibn's siiperficial finaings, but before arriving at any decision will have the position completely investigated.