forestry slash

[harm_less]

The blame is fair enough; they're supposed to clean up, not leave the slash lying there - & had they done so there may not have been so much damage during the cyclone.

It's also possible that a good amount of the silt deposited was from forestry land.
When trees are felled, it often leads to erosion until the new trees are established.

The problem lies not only in the felling of forestry on a regular basis which has been likened to the effects of 80 years of 'normal' erosion each time a harvest happens but also in the geology of the East Coast's hill country. Having worked in both Taranaki's and Northern Hawkes Bay's hilly inland areas in the past it became obvious to me that while they are both composed of sedimentary soil types, Hawkes Bay's soils are very much less stable than Taranaki's papa (mudstone) hills. Heavy rainfall results in massive amounts more subsidence on the East Coast than in Taranaki and Radiata pines do little to stabilise this country. Add to this the ground disturbance resulting from the logging process and a shit ton of tree waste left lying around and the whole caboodle heads off down the nearest valley and eventually the sea.

In hindsight this region of New Zealand should have remained in native forests which are far more effective at stabilising the terrain but also in absorbing heavy rainfall before releasing at in a gradual rate over days or weeks. I would hazard a guess that the forested hill country of the nearby Ureweras faired much better than the pine forests and grasslands which have contributed to the silt and slash avalanche.