Hon Jim Sutton is not entering into any correspondence on forestry issues.

Jan Burns
Executive Secretary

-----Original Message-----
From: Euan Mason [SMTP:fore057@its.canterbury.ac.nz]
Sent: Friday, 10 December 1999 04:13 AM
To: Helen Clark; Jenny Shipley; Winston Peters; Sue Gaffy; Pete Hodgson; Jim Sutton; Jeanette Fitzsimons
Subject: Comment on beech scheme policy

Dear Helen Clark,

I am writing out of concern for the way policy on the beech scheme has been set. One of my skills is forest growth and yield modelling. Last week I had an opportunity to look at Efford's model of the "effects of logging" on beech forest, currently available from Landcare's web site. If you know what you are doing, the model can be configured to provide a sustainable outcome, but the default logging option adds all logging removals to predicted mortality and doesn't increase ingrowth in the new gaps created. This wouldn't pass muster for an undergraduate dissertation. It is astonishing that policy has been influenced by such a gross misrepresentation from an otherwise reputable research organisation.

I do not pretend to offer an opinion on whether or not the beech scheme should proceed. Any such decision involves value judgements, and my judgement would be simply one among 3.6 million. My concern is that policy decisions concerning forests should be based on sound science, and I urge you to consult more widely about the effects of alternatives that we have for these forests.

Yours Sincerely,
Euan Mason