RELATION OF FORESTRY TO AGRICULTURE, ETC. I4I 



enormous. I think what he says is true that it would be far 

 better if it were put under timber. There are enormous tracts 

 of land, all pretty low-lying land. I do not think that any of it 

 will go more than looo feet above sea-level. I do not know the 

 highest point in the Cheviot range, but I think most of it is 

 below 1200 feet. There are no altitude difficulties. It is a part 

 of the country which could be easily got at by means of railways 

 and other means of transportation. That has not been very much 

 referred to, but this part of the country is a field for forestry. I 

 think it is one of the principal parts of Scotland from that point 

 of view. Mr Leven referred to allotments and fruit-farming, and 

 in connection with fruit-farming he alluded to the numbers of 

 people who have to be taken to the fruit farms about 

 Blairgowrie at a certain time of the year. It is very difficult 

 to get sufficient people for that purpose. These people are 

 only employed for a certain time, during the period that the 

 fruit picking is on. It shows that there is a want of balance 

 somewhere — that there should be something else to keep those 

 people on the land at other times of the year. I think that 

 forestry and farming, including fruit - farming and market- 

 gardening, ought to go hand in hand, where they can possibly 

 work together. It would be found, if that could be managed, 

 that there would be sufficient employment for all classes, and 

 plenty of people would be kept on the ground instead of 

 being driven into the towns. With regard to high-class 

 farming, I do not think forestry has very much to do with it. I 

 think that high-class farming can only be carried on profitably 

 as an economic thing in the better parts of the country, and 

 probably on the outskirts of large cities. So far as forestry 

 goes in connection with farming of that sort, I do not think 

 forestry enters into it at all. I think what is wanted there is 

 shelter belts. Now I do not think that shelter belts have 

 anything to do with forestry at all. Shelter belts are merely 

 for a certain purpose, and the trees are not intended to be — 

 if they were grown as timber trees there would be no use for 

 shelter, Mr Leven referred to another point in connection 

 with those shelter belts. He said that farmers had protested 

 against them, as in certain cases they prevented the crops 

 getting the sun and thus prevented them from ripening. I 

 think great mistakes have been made in laying out these 

 shelter belts by running them east and west, and it is 



