LAND IN CANTERBURY v. SOUTHLAND.
TO THK EDWOB. ; Sir,—Having seen m your journal some time ago the report given by two prominent gentlemen who had been visiting this part | of the country, I should like to place my observations during twelve months residence. I beg to contradiofc the statement made by one of the gentlemen that the Canterbury settlers are satisfied. I have the unsolicited statement of three individuals who are very sorry that they left Canterbury to take up land down there. To show the difference between land here and Canterbury, I have only to state that land broken up m early winter and exposed to frost and snow and properly cultivated did not yield 15 bushels per acre, and with manure only 22 bushel? per acre. The land at first sight saems of good quality, but the experience of an old Canterburyite who has been managing an estate for eight years, says fallow 12 months then it will grow a good crop of turnips, and after then a probable 50 bushel crop of oat-;, bab fco make sure the land requires at least 2 tons of lime per acre owing to the coatinual rains which we are m the habib of getting. I may mention that my neighbour told me that one winter he did not have the harness on his horses for six weeks owing to the wet. In looking over my diary, I find that from the 20th April to Ist Deoamber rain fell on 46 flays. It will be seen from this how the farmer is handicapped through not being able to work his land here as m ■Canterbury. There were three samples of land sent from here to che Agricultural College, and the report showed a total absence of lime. I saw a demonstration of the value of limed land not two miles from here. Two sections joining each other both were cultivated at the same time, m fact the limed land got a discing less, and yet it yielded 70 bushels, where as the unlimed land was only 30 bushels per acre. So much for the agriculture. I should now like to mention the stock. We have a freezing works here, which embraces a district as large as Ashburton, and yet there are only about 100 lambs frozen here to 1000 at Fairfield. The climate is too severe for fattening stock, and the grass does not Feem to have the same healthy appearance. The dairying has been a partial failure. The price for butter fat was nos so good as last year, and the milk supply was 20 per cent less, owing to the dry summer. In oon-clu-ion, the farmer m Canterbury has got a long way the best of it, because he can get a return, straight away from his land and can therefore pay a better price for it. He has far the best market, and the stock does not suffer from the climate. Experience has proved that not one m ten of the Canterbury -men that tried farming down here have succeeded; therefore my advice to Canterbury men is—do not come here— unless to gain experience.—lam etc., An Ex-Canterbitryite. I Mataura, April 22.
Permanent link to this item
LAND IN CANTERBURY v. SOUTHLAND., Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXII, Issue 6553, 25 April 1905
LAND IN CANTERBURY v. SOUTHLAND. Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXII, Issue 6553, 25 April 1905
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.