I have never claimed to be an authority on anything much
but, just like a number of this column's readers, l have endured many
experiences over a varied career that have helped to fashion some of the more
informed opinions l now hold.
It is also true
that my most strongly held convictions are based having had the opportunity to
witness all sides of an issue, argument, event - call it what you will.
That is as it
should be.
The development of
the Forestry Industry in this country is the best example l know where our
opinions are formed depending on how we are personally affected by its
introduction to the area where we live.
Unfortunately,
this relatively immature sector is gaining a life of its own and it is becoming
hard to keep up with events that will shape its future - and ours!
What's more, in
most parts of rural New Zealand, the industry hasn't yet reached puberty but is
showing all the signs of a teenager demanding to be satisfied beyond it's
parent's ability to cope.
My own experiences
of the forestry industry's impact on a region are varied enough to help form a
balanced view of how we should control and if necessary, stabilise or stop its
growth.
I am a farm
forester myself, having personally overseen a significant part of the farm
being planted in pine trees as an adjunct to the economic development of our
property.
I have become
knowledgable of all aspects of the farm forestry cycle - planting, pruning,
thinning and harvesting to the extent than l understand the ramifications of
making this choice. I was so involved that l almost knew each tree by name.
The following are
the pluses and minuses of allowing this rabid dog through the gate!
Benefits:
* I have certainly
benefitted financially due to the extra income generated from this part of our
farm.
However the
financial rewards are a qualified benefit and need to be looked at in net terms
after the cost of establishment are deducted. See negatives.
* Over the 27 yr
life of the rotation, we have enjoyed much improved returns from what had been
a relatively unproductive part of the property (steep, erodible hill country)
that had traditionally supported quite low stock numbers.
* Our productive
unit has contributed much more to the number of local job opportunities which
is important in the context of a community that normally experiences higher
than average unemployment numbers.
* The financial
benefits from our forestry operation are not limited to our property.
The regional
economy benefits from the returns generated by our forestry block in a number
of ways and as a result, the industry has become an important contributor to
the well being of the community.
Negatives:
* The
establishment costs on this type of virgin marginal country are high.
Based on my own
experience, due to the difficulty in gaining the services of scrub cutters,
roading contractors, planting and thinning crews when you want them - for those
contractors who are established in the area, it is almost a license to print
money.
Consequently, the
return on capital investment has to be based on the costs associated with the
development over the whole of the 27 year cycle and any comparison with other
forms of investment should be assessed on the net returns during that time.
* It is advisable
to get a handle on the cost of cartage to the nearest export port before
deciding to include forestry as one of your cornerstone investments. This item
is probably the largest fixed cost for the average forester operating on the
marginal hill country areas of his or her farm.
There is a rough
formula that is widely used to calculate the profitability of forestry blocks
and the most important ingredient in the calculations is usually the distance from
the export port. For that reason alone, there are a number of large forestry
estates in our area that, in a year when export prices are at a 5 yr average
level, are uneconomic.
The only way to
change that situation is to build an export outlet or some form of processing
plant closer to the harvested property. For most faced with that dilemma, it will never happen.
However, that type
of scenario is the subject of the most intense regional development debates
being held as we speak between land owners of some of the more remote areas of
the country and the Regional Development Ministries representing the crown.
* The
establishment of the forestry industry on this marginal hill country is usually
associated with extremely high annual infrastructure (roading and
drainage) maintenance costs that have
the capacity to threaten the existing local pastoral economy and the problem
can only get worse if a decision is made to extend the plantings of the
existing estate in the area.
* Local authority
policing of the existing harvesting consents is another factor that needs to be
addressed before we add a single tree to the nation's plantings.
Our property was
at the epicentre of the recent Uawa/Tolaga Bay floods that have decimated large
parts of many of my neighbour's properties leaving slash and silt on paddocks
that would normally be an integral part of the more productive farming
operations. Yet it is obvious that much of this devastation could have been
avoided if the Council had been more vigilant policing the conditions of the
consents that describe in detail the obligations imposed on the forestry
owners.
* Unfortunately,
communities like the Tairawhiti on the East Coast where l live have their own
decision making problems when looking at their region's suitability for either
a restricted activity or an expansion of existing plantings. Each region must
weigh up the above opposing factors when deciding whether to include this
industry in their Long Term Plans for economic development.
Which leads me to
the question l posed when beginning this discussion.
Is the Forestry
Industry either the saviour for areas that are in economic decline or a
potential scourge that should only be tolerated if it can be strictly
controlled?
I guess the answer
to that question will probably be determined by the success of Shane Jones's
overtures to those who own the last remaining tracts of land suitable for
planting his One Billion trees before the next election.
Not only is time
running out for deals to be negotiated that transfer the control of enough dirt
to accommodate his ambitious proposal but unsurprisingly, he is finding the
going tougher than expected even when dealing mainly with Maori groups. Their
modern leaders are pretty smart boys and make no secret of wanting top of the
range compensation in exchange for their signatures.
Good on them but l
personally hope Minister Jones fails to achieve his objectives. l sympathise
with Iwi's attraction to this super salesman but the antidote he is trying to
sell them as a supposed cure for their local economic problems is only
marginally better than snake oil. It is encased in a bottle disguised as the
Provincial Growth Fund and while it may initially benefit the selected groups
with single issue difficulties, it will do more harm than good for the bulk of
the people in these communities who are starved of even the basic facilities
needed for a quality of life they currently only dream about.
Oh, how we do need
Shane Jones's money but, with the greatest respect for his current generous
offer, it needs to be spent restructuring our neglected infrastructure - not on
more trees. A decision along those lines will do much more for the remote
communities we have identified where the gains have a greater chance of being
permanent.
I'm hopeful that
other regions looking at similar problems will have come to the same
conclusions.
Clive Bibby is a commentator, consultant, farmer and
community leader, who lives in Tolaga Bay.
No comments:
Post a Comment