TREE-FELLING DURING WAR 179 



agriculture is tlie inain industry of the country-side, 

 and that the new planting schemes are intended to 

 dovetail in with and assist agriculture in the districts 

 having the poorer soils, the success of the new 

 industry will be gravely imperilled. 



Some of the steps it will be necessary to take 

 with the object of affording protection to the existing 

 woods and new plantations^ from man, animals, 

 birds (including game), and pests were then dealt 

 with, and education in forestry briefly glanced at. 



The important question as to whether State owned 

 or privately owned forests would be preferable in 

 this country was discussed, and the reasons against 

 the former, on any extensive scale, adduced. 



The present ownership of the land, and the nature 

 of the land required for the future afforestation 

 schemes were considered, and reasons given for the 

 opinion held that by far the greater proportion of 

 land required for afforestatipn should be acquired 

 by either ordinary leasing or leases on a profit-sharing 

 basis — the State only purchasing areas sufficient to 

 enable it to demonstrate in different parts of the 

 country that commercial forestry could be made 

 to pay. 



On the subject of the areas felled over during the 

 war, it was held that as their owners had patriotic- 

 ally placed these areas at the disposal of the nation 

 for war purposes, in all cases where the owner was 

 not in a position to replant them, and since it is in 

 the interests of national economy that they should 

 be replanted at as early a date as possible, a case 

 ' would appear to lie for the State affording assistance. 



