340 The N.Z. Journal of Science and Technology. [July 
The establishment of plantations either for true forestry purposes, 
or for shelter, or for other reasons, has been carried out by the actual 
planting of the young trees by hand. This method limits the area 
available to such as can be utilized at a minimum of expense. Thus 
rugged much-broken country of little value for pastoral purposes cannot 
be made use of for afforestation on the above lines ; indeed, planting 
such places with young trees would be virtually impossible. On the 
Canterbury Plains, and to some extent elsewhere in New Zealand, planta¬ 
tions of Eucalypti have been raised successfully by sowing seeds, the 
ground having been generally first ploughed and a seed-bed prepared. 
This method obviously costs a good deal, and on unploughable ground is 
not practicable. Undoubtedly, could artificial plantations be raised every¬ 
where by planting young trees, and if such planting could be carried out 
at a very much smaller cost than is at present the case, then no other 
method of afforestation would be necessary. But it is quite the contrary. 
Planting at even so cheap a rate as is the case with the State plantations 
greatly limits the area to be afforested. Natural afforestation by means of 
seeds from “ mother trees ” ought to be carried out at less than one-tenth 
the cost of even the present relatively cheap methods, and perhaps this 
estimate is too high. This matter of cheap afforestation is all-essential, 
so that even if my opinion as expressed in this paper may prove too 
optimistic the expectation of making forests in the manner suggested 
should surely be worthy of experiment. Such experiments could be carried 
out at a quite trifling cost. Should they succeed—and the evidence in 
favour of such success seems indisputable—the ultimate gain to New 
Zealand could only be expressed in millions of pounds sterling. 
I cannot do better than quote that eminent authority on forestry 
matters, Sir William Schlich, on natural regeneration 
Merits of Natural Regeneration by Seed. 
(a.) Advantages. 
1. Natural regeneration involves less expenditure than sowing or planting. In 
some cases the outlay may be absolutely nil, but in most cases some artificial help has 
to be given, either by working (wounding) the soil, or by sowing and planting. Still, 
the outlay is considerably smaller. It must not be overlooked, however, that in the 
majority of cases natural regeneration requires much time ; as long as the shelter- 
tre'es increase sufficiently in size and quality so as to make up for any loss on this account 
no harm is done, but where this is not the case artificial regeneration may actually 
be more profitable, since no loss of increment occurs. 
2. Damage by frost, drought, and weed-growth is avoided, or at any rate con¬ 
siderably reduced. The same may be said as regards damage by insects, though 
perhaps not to an equal extent. 
3. The activity of the soil is maintained, and, to a considerable extent, rendered 
independent of climatic influences. 
4. Owing to the greater number of plants per unit of area, clearer and straighter 
stems are produced than in plantings, and also frequently in sowings, though the 
difference in the latter case is less decided. This advantage can be nullified to a 
considerable extent by dense planting and sowing, but in that case the cost is pro¬ 
portionately increased. 
(■ b .) Disadvantages. 
1. The method is more complicated and difficult than artificial regeneration; hence 
it demands more skilful foresters. 
2. The intermittent nature of seed years produces many drawbacks as regards the 
equalization of the yield and the control of operations. 
3. The removal of produce is also more expensive. 
Summing-up. 
Neither the artificial nor the natural method of regeneration is the best at all times 
and under all circumstances ; only a consideration of the local conditions can lead to 
a sound decision as to which is preferable in a given case. 
