Dr. A.G.D. Whyte

P.O. Box 12297

CHRISTCHURCH 8030

Ph/Fax (03) 3320435

e-mail <fore020@its.canterbury.ac.nz>

16 November, 1999

Ms Helen Clark,

Leader of Opposition

Parliament Buildings

WELLINGTON

Dear Ms Clark,

Re: Labour Party's Policy on Harvesting in State Indigenous Forests

I listened to the Crossfire programme on Sunday 14 November. I believe your party's and your views on the issue of timber harvesting in State indigenous forests are based on misinformation. I sent an open letter to the Labour Party on 15 September following your announcement of the new policy and The Hon. Jim Sutton's resignation as Labour's spokesman on forestry. Either you have not read the letter and checked the important facts I included, or else you and your party have chosen to ignore them. I think the New Zealand public deserves to hear your reasons for disregarding the concerns I raised, but there is nothing I have heard or read in the media about them.

What was even more disconcerting was the sop you offered West Coasters with the expansion of plantations of exotic species. Where is the land for planting to come from, given that there are 1.5 million hectares of indigenous forest on the West Coast and no other land use available for any expansion? Anyway, I believe that the best option for the existing plantations is to replace them at the end of their rotation with planted indigenous forest. I consider that, from an aesthetic appeal point of view, and the existence of niche markets for indigenous timber as distinct from low quality radiata pine, this is a highly desirable option. But your proposed policy eliminates that possibility, which would need a continuation of sustainable harvesting of TWC's indigenous forest estate to generate the financial investment needed to do this and to retain the skills and expertise needed for sustainable forest management.

There can be no argument that our indigenous forest ecosystems are under far, far greater threats and pressures from possums, mustelids, feral cats and dogs, and wasps than from logging operations. The possums eat their way through at least 7.5 million tonnes of forest vegetation each year (compared with around 0.2 M t of indigenous timber, while other pests have huge adverse impacts on our native birdlife, where no logging has ever occurred. Your proposed policy does not address these issues, nor the financial consequences of trying to cope with them through increased taxes.

Why should I, a professional conservationist who believes implicitly in sustaining resources, accept your proposed irrational forest policy, and why should I trust your judgement on other issues if you continue to subscribe to this kind of irrationality? Why, moreover, as someone with no political party affiliation, should I vote for Labour and its irrational policies?

Yours sincerely,

A.G.D. Whyte