26 About Trees, Shrubs and Climbing Plants for S.A. 



of water caused by storms. The roots bind together the soil 

 so that it is scarcely possible for any serious washaway to 

 take place, even on a fairly steep slope. 



(e) Increase of value and beauty of farm. A farm well planted 

 with trees is worth twenty-five per cent, more than a bare 

 veld and wire-fenced farm. Its attractive and pleasing ap- 

 pearance, its warmth and shelter for stock, and the actual 

 cash value of the trees themselves, are all real factors in 

 valuation. Money put down in planting trees is well in- 

 vested, and will all come back again with good interest. 



It may be that our farmers, or many of them at any rate, 

 are at present better pleased by a long veld view than by 

 confined vistas. We are used to great distances. There is 

 something grandly enthralling about the illimitable, true; 

 but a farm can never be called really beautiful, or even really 

 comfortable, until its boundaries are guarded, its fields shel- 

 tered, and the homestead nestles snugly under the protection 

 of trees. 



(2) Arguments Against. 



There are always some few reasons why we should not do a 

 thing. No good thing is without some few disadvantages. But 

 the reasonable man will carefully weigh up the arguments for 

 and against, and act in accordance with the result. Some few 

 reasons have been advanced even against tree planting for shelter, 

 and it is as well to see what they are worth. For instance, one 

 man, whose farm is only a very few hundred acres, will say 

 that he cannot possibly spare any land for trees other than 

 enough for firewood. The reply to this would be to refer again 

 to the certain increase of crops where shelter is given. It is 

 always better economy to cultivate 10 acres yielding 150 muids 

 of grain, than to cultivate 15 acres yielding the same quantity. 

 If, then, a field be reduced by one-third, even, in order to obtain 

 the necessary shelter, it will pay. But the actual proportion of 

 ground taken up will not be anything like this. 



Another objection is that the cost is prohibitive. This will be 

 answered in Section 5. 



It is pointed out that the ground actually occupied by the trees 

 is not all the land lost, and that the roots of the trees spread 

 afar, robbing the soil for long distances away. There is some 

 force in their argument :f Wattles or Casuarinas are planted. 

 But why choose such trees? Some types have root systems which 

 are compact and confined enough. 



Another, and a more reasonable objection, is that if trees are 

 planted in the North of a field, the Autumn sun is not able to 

 reach and ripen the grain. There is a section of the field which 

 is continuously cold and shaded. Sunlight is essential to a crop 

 for ripening the grain, and to shut out the sunlight must be un- 

 wise. Well, there may be some little logic in this, but the section 



