9 



licenses were issued." Of the mode of stripping generally it may 

 he stated here that it has been characterised by shameful and wan- 

 ton waste, the destruction of bark in a single year being estimated 

 at fully one-half of the aggregate yield. In every wattle district 

 of the colony the same thing prevailed, over 50 per cent, of the 

 bark being left on the trees. The evidence disclosed the fact that 

 trees carrying 80 and 90 Ib. of first-class bark were denuded of 

 only a third, and sometimes less, simply owing to the greed and 

 rapacity of the strippers, who tore off the bark from the lower part 

 of the trunk, leaving all the rest to waste. Trees also of moderate 

 size, six to eight inches in diameter two feet from the ground, bear- 

 ing from 30 to 40 Ib. of bark, received similar treatment. In those 

 districts stripped in past seasons, where mature trees were naturally 

 scarce, the work of spoliation was complete, young saplings of 

 whipstick size being ruthlessly destroyed for the sake of a few 

 ounces of bark. A total want of supervision was, in many instan- 

 ces, apparent, the regulations, such as they were, being openly 

 violated. The Board observed that, within half a mile from a 

 police station, in one of the most important bark districts of the 

 colony, the strippers were actually carrying on a system of destruc- 

 tion under the immediate notice of the authorities, without any 

 interference being attempted. Only in one instance out of every 

 twenty was the tree cut down either before or after stripping, 

 although the Second Regulation printed on the back of every 

 license stipulates that u no licensee shall remove the bark from 

 any tree until such tree has been felled, and if any person offend 

 herein he shall be punished according to law." Beyond this regu- 

 lation, the State hitherto imposed no restriction on the actual 

 operations of the strippers. The Board did not fail to probe this 

 evident miscarriage of this provision, and it was found that the fault 

 did not rest so much with the officers of the Crown as with the 

 local administrators of justice. In some instances the offenders 

 against the regulations were prosecuted and the charge fully sub- 

 stantiated, but so inadequate were the fines inflicted to check the 

 indiscriminate stripping that the Crown officers were thoroughly 

 disheartened. Often they would travel some 20 miles in order to 

 serve a summons in one direction, the police court being as far away 

 in the opposite direction, and the delinquent would escape on paying 

 the nominal fine of 2s 6d. or 5s. The disproportionate punishment 

 meted out by the local benches of magistrates was, without doubt, 

 an indirect incentive to careless and indiscriminate stripping, and 

 the Board would, therefore, suggest that special attention should 

 be directed towards maintaining the efficiency of the police super- 

 vision by the imposition of a penalty of not less than 5, with 

 rewards where the convictions have been the result of unusual 

 efforts. 



