Retorts

Conservation

Mike Harding's letter [June 1993] replying to Pat Palmer's Viewpoint [May 1993], raises an interesting issue.

The original piece pointed out that the South Island tussock grasslands are not, in general, the original plant communities of their current range, but have arisen as a result of human modification of the environment. The author suggested that wilding pines would be no less natural than tussock, and that they would in fact have beneficial effects towards re-establishing soil fertility and native forests.

Mr Harding, on the other hand, sees the tussock country as a natural response to deforestation, and a unique part of our natural heritage, valuable in itself. He feels that it should be preserved.

Both positions have reason behind them. So what do we preserve? Are we trying to maintain (and if necessary re-establish) "original" ecosystems, are we saving the ecosystem that was there when we first noticed it, are we trying to maximise ecological diversity, or should our goal be something else again? What do people think?

P. Dalton, Christchurch