Our Forest Assets—Report by Sir David Hutchins.

Progress, Volume XV, Issue 11, 1 July 1920, Page 841

Our Forest Assets— Report by Sir David Hutchins.

The Case for Conservation. Timber, Settlement and Revenue. Two broad conclusions are presented in the report by Sir David Hutchins on "New Zealand Forestry" which has just been issued by the Government. _ One is that the native forests of this country are still capable of becoming one of its richest national assets—an asset which for all time will yield a big annual return of wealth, lighten the burdens of taxation, lower the cost of living, and support close settlement on extensive areas that otherwise will be barren and will carry a sparse population or none at all. The other main conclusion is that unless immediate measures are taken to conserve the remaining native forests and work them as forests are worked, with enormous annual profit, in Europe and in many other parts of the world, the opportunity of preserving them as a wealth-produc-ing national estate will speedily disappear. These conclusions, stated in the report with all possible emphasis, are based upon the first comprehensive survey of the indigenous forests of the Dominion ever made by an expert forester. Indiscriminate forest destruction has gone so far, Sir David Hutchins declares, that only a short further persistence in the present policy will render the restoration of the forests almost impossible at any reasonable cost. "That will mean," he adds, "the final loss of the finest forests in the Southern Hemisphere, and with them the loss of an export trade worth, in the future, more than either wool or dairy produce. It will mean the loss of the best industry New Zealand has ever possessed or is ever likely to possess, and the handicapping of two or three other industries in depriving them of their raw material at economical rates. It will mean a continued rise in the present high cost of living. ..." On the other hand, the distinguished author of "New Zealand Forestry" has much that is encouraging to say about the possibility of restoring the native forests to rich productivity. These forests, he points out, have been persistently undervalued. His own opinion is that on the whole they may be classed as above the average of forests elsewhere. The kauri, he adds, is "unique in the world" as a timber producing tree. The largest kauri of which the dimensions are on record contained twice as much timber as the largest of the Californian big trees. Again, the average mill able forest of New Zealand carries about double the timber "stand" of the Appalachians Forest, which is being redeemed for the American nation at a cost of millions, and was described by the late ex-President Roosevelt as "the heaviest and most beautiful hardwood forest of the Continent." One of the most interesting and valuable sections of the report is based upon an exhaustive investigation of the rate of growth of New Zealand as compared with European trees. The broad conclusion reached

is that the principal New Zealand trees grow about twice as fast as the five chief forest trees of Europe

—oak, beech, Scotch pine, spruce, and silver fir. Kauri, the report observes, is superior to oak in every respect but strength, and as a tree it grows some 50 to 75 per cent, faster than oak. In showing what New Zealand lias lost by the wasteful destruction of forests, Sir David Hutchins uses a particularly striking illustration. lie remarks that the Puhipuhi kauri forest, which was destroyed by fire years ago, occupied a space of 17,000 acres, an area less than that of "Wellington Harbour from the sea to Somes Island. This single forest, he observes, if it had been preserved, and fully stocked with young kauri, would now have been worth an amount that would cover the cost of rebuilding Greater Wellington from the bare ground, "with better-graded streets, and the boulevards its peerless site merits." Forests that "will Endure. While he emphasises the loss that has been suffered in the improvident destruction of forests, Sir David Hutchins is, of course, even more concerned to show how they can be profitably worked in future. In dealing with doubts that have been raised as to whether the native forests can be perpetuated successfully and with profit, he relies not upon his own knowledge and experience only, but upon a considerable body of evidence collected over a long period of years by New Zealand observers. It must suffice here to state briefly that he expresses a most decided opinion not only that the native forests can be preserved, but under that cultivation, as it is understood in Europe and elsewhere, they can be made immensely more productive than they ever were in their virgin state. The cultivated kauri forest, it is estimated, will produce eight times as much timber on a given area in a given time as the wild forest. Sir David Hutchins points out in this connection that the forests of Prrssia, in a climate less favourable to tree-growth than that of New Zealand, have increased their timber-yield nine times, and their money-yield more than ten times during sixty or seventy yearsa man's lifetime. Though detailed and interesting comparisons are drawn in the report between the native forests and plantations of imported trees, it can only be mentioned here that Sir David Hutchins rates the plantations as in every way vastly inferior to the indigenous forest, whether they are regarded simply as an investment or as a source of future timber-supply. Where plantations are made in the open, he thinks it will usually be best to plant imported trees, but he is doubtful whether such plantations will become established as self-regenerating forests. On the other hand, he is of opinion that a number of imported exotics would spread naturally if planted in the native forests to thicken the stand of timber to the acre.

An Important Source of Revenue.

As showing the possibilities of future forestry in New Zealand, Sir David Hutchins declares that half a million acres of kauri forest—an area that might yet be restoredwould ultimately return a net amount of more than £lO per acre per annum, or

over £5,000,000 per annum in the aggregate, to the State. With the forest at this stage of production, this half-million acres would also afford settled homes and permanent employment for nearly seven thousand families. As they stand, the kauri forests offer some scope for permanent settlement, and a considerable amount of employment in forest restoration and development work; and Sir David Hutchins states that in the process of restoration the return from "well-timbered acres" would more than cover the outlay on areas from which the kauri forest has well-nigh disappeared. Ultimately the kauri forests, on account of their rapid growth and the valuable timber they yield, will be the richest in the Dominion. Since for the time being, however, these forests have been reduced to a mere remnant, more important possibilities so far as the immediate future is concerned attach to other classes of forest, notably totara. Totara forests of great value and extent, Sir David Hutchins remarks, remain to be demarcated, and he is of opinion that these forests are only less valuable than kauri He adds that his estimate of an ultimate net return of over £lO per acre per year from kauri forest will be applicable with but little reduction to a large part of the forests in the northern half of the North Island.

Forest Settlement.

The present total area of forest in New Zealand not on native land or otherwise privately owned is ten and a half million acres, and of this only a small part, the report states, is as yet under nominally protective forestry. According to European standards, New Zealand ought to have sixteen million acres of permanent forest, but Sir David Hutchins suggests that on account of the mountainous character of much of its land this country needs a larger proportion of forest in order to secure the fullest extension of settlement and a maximum volume of production. If demarcation on approved lines is undertaken in this country, only poor land (much of it mountain country of little value for ordinary settlement) will be retained or set aside as forest. Sir David Hutchins estimates, however, that cultivated forest on this poor land, the bulk of it included in the "unoccupied third" of the Dominion, would ultimately support, on the soil and in sawmills, about as many people (workers and their families) as now constitute the total population of the Dominion. Such forest estates, he declares, would be amongst the most valuable in the world—they would easily surpass the most valuable forests in Prance and Germany—and they can be put in order usually for a fraction of the value of the timber on them, or at the worst for the cost of grassing.

Reckless Improvidence.

As showing with what reckless improvidence the native forest has been given over to destruction, Sir David Htuchins points out that during the last fourteen years, over 829,000 acres of bush land have been alienated without any attempt at forest demarcation. He also cites numerous examples from the Crown Lands Guide" of land which might be very valuable as forest offered under lease or for outright

sale for trifling sums. In one case twenty thousand acres of "very wild country, mostly bush," in the Westland district, were offered at an annual rental of £lO for the whole twenty thousand acres. Another example is that of 11,852 acres of precipitous mountain forests in Marlborough offered in eight lots for outright purchase at an average price of 6s. 3d. per acre. As to what is happening in Auckland province, the report cites from the "Crown Lands Guide" examples of land carrying some kauri and other trees —land possibly capable of being developed in time into fully stocked kauri forest offered for sale at prices in the vicinity of £1 per acre. Sir David Hutchins estimates the current alienation of demarcatable forest (on Crown and Native lands) at about 30,000 acres yearly. A smaller national loss, he observes, would be involved in destroying the State plantations of imported trees than in continuing this ruinous policy of forest alienation without demarcation.

The Remedy.

The remedial measures recommended by Sir David Hutchins are epitomised in a concluding passage of his —"The alienation of further good forests on poor or steep mountain land should be arrested without delay, and forest demarcation put in hand to finally separate the land best suited for forestry from that best suited for farming. To do the demarcation and to work the forest estates as soon as they are formed, there should be a technical, non-political Forest Department, on the lines of the American Forest Service."