THE PUHIPUHI KAURI FOREST. y(t 
The Lesson of the Past.—l have taken out these figures not with the 
view of criticizing what was done long ago. One must not judge too 
severely the reckless forest waste of thirty or forty years ago, for the 
New-Zealander of those days came mostly from a country (England) 
where State forestry was tabooed, and he was very short of cash. Says 
W. Pember Reeves, ‘“‘ Public affairs during the decade (1880-90) resolved 
themselves chiefly into a series of experiments for filling the treasury and 
carrying on the work of land-settlement.’’ 
But nowadays, when New Zealand is rich beyond the dreams of thirty 
or forty years ago, and with the proud boast of the best war record of 
any of the dominions, when only two great wants remain—population 
and a forest policy—it is useful to glance back and face the figures 
showing what was lost to the country when the best Kauri forest it ever 
had was allowed to be destroyed without demarcation. 
Writing under date 9th May, 1917, the Commissioner of Lands, 
Auckland, in a letter to me says, ‘‘I quite agree with your remarks 
regarding the irreparable loss of this [the Puhipuhi] forest. It shows 
clearly the necessity for the protection and conservation of the Waipoua 
Forest.”’ 
The Picture not overdrawn.—It is as clear as daylight that the 
national loss in the destruction of the Puhipuhi Forest is not over- 
estimated. The recollections of those who knew the forest have been 
discounted down to a general timber stand not exceeding heavy stands 
of similar timber elsewhere. To allow for the irregularities in the 
timber stands of most wild forests I have taken the Kauri timber stand 
at Puhipuhi as little more than one-fourth of what careful observers 
say they saw. It is true that I have taken present-day prices of Kauri 
timber. But when the Puhipuhi Forest was destroyed it was evident 
that these values must come. Laslet, the well-known Timber Inspector 
to the British Admiralty, had said as much after his visit to New Zea- 
land. (Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. 46, 1913.) As an illustration of the 
direct money loss in the Puhipuhi Forest these comparisons may be 
made :— 
Comparisons.—lf ‘‘ Greater ’’ Wellington were to be totally destroyed 
by an earthquake worse than that of San Francisco, it could be entirely 
rebuilt (with better-graded streets and the boulevards its peerless site 
merits) for what would have been the value of the Puhipuhi Forest at 
present prices, and supposing the whole forest of 17,000 acres to be fully 
stocked with Kauri as a normal Kauri forest—viz., £11,916,000 net. 
The official valuation of the present buildings, streets, and all ‘‘ improve- 
ments,’’ except harbour-works, is £8,864,855 (Corporation Year-book, 
1916-17). And the area of this forest, whose destruction has cost the 
country so dearly, was less than that of Wellington Harbour from the 
sea to Somes Island (p. 179)! 
Again, the total value of all the Kauri “‘ gum’’ exported up to date, 
under £18,000,000, is not equal to twice the value of this one Puhipuhi 
Forest taken as above; and the total value of all the coke and coal 
produced in the Dominion up to now is only a little over the value of 
two Puhipuhi Forests. 
InpustTrRIAL Loss Towarps £12,000,000. 
Behind this direct money loss 1s the industrial loss. Kauri sells now 
(1918) at £1 8s., boards, medium quality, per 100 sup. ft. at Auckland. 
This is about three times the present market royalty, or stumpage value, 
