Ashburton Guardian Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. THURSDAY, MAY 17, 1923. MORE PROFIT ON THE LAND.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XLIII, Issue 9871, 17 May 1923, Page 4

Ashburton Guardian Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. THURSDAY, MAY 17, 1923. MORE PROFIT ON THE LAND.

'As we have occasionally emphasised, the chief problem of the land is to make more money out of it. We were therefore specially delighted that Mr A. H. Cockayne, the government biologist, said the things he did at the first night session of the Ashburton harm School. His

lecture was securely based on statistics, which were arranged in a very yivid manner. Yet from first to last he kept in view of himself and his attentive, critical audience the ultimate ideal of bigger profits. He started with a reference to the early ages when rotation had its first birthday and wheat began to be alternated with bare fallow because of this system’s greater crops. But that kept half the farm idle. This was rctified by spring-sowing of oats or barley, so that two crops were secured

before the fallow. The Scotch, of course, sowed oats for the sake of their porridge, the Germans sowed barley for their beer, but the Italians, whose country was ill-fitted for the production of meat, grew pulse crops (peas and beans) for the sake of their nitrogen. It was then noticed that grain after pulse throve as well as grain after and that discovery formed the starting point of all rotations of to-day. The main object of all rotations in mixed

farming was to precede the “cash” crop by an improving crop, such as clover, peas, or other legumes. Mixed farming implied (1) the growing of grass and supplementary crops for feeding to stock, and (2) a crop to sell for cash. Hence the rotations aimed to grow the “cash” crop at the most advantageous period in their duration. The value of this princi-

ple in general was not lessened by the fact that some Canterbury soils were so rich that wheat could follow wheat. The lecturer had some important

suggestions to make respecting the laying-down of grass, condemning the Canterbury practice of preceding it by a robbing

or “cash” crop such as oats. He strongly advocated the northern practice of laying down grass after a fed-off crop, such as rape or turnips. Backed up Tby his figures, he was able to say

the southerners are not manuring like the northerners, and he urged us to share in the great benefits which the North Island is deriving from superphosphate and _ Nauru Island phosphate (particularly for grass top-dress-

ings) both by the increased growth and by the increased fattening virtues of the growth produced. The frequent failures of the rape and turnip crops gave rise to an animated debate

on possible substitutes. Mr Cockayne was inclined to believe that none of the alternatives was a satisfactory substitute for the

popular supplementaries of the present practice. We may here review those suggested 'and their faults. Lucerne was admitted by him to be a satisfactory food, but its maximum (benefit involved haymaking,

and it gave its greatest yield only in favoured, areas. In the

best American lucerne belts (sometimes irrigated)—namely, Oalfii'orniat, Texas, and New Mexico—the yield reached six or seven tons of hay per year. Thousand-headed kale was a surer crop than rape but fattened more slowly. One farmer said he had succeeded by giving the lambs changes between rape and kale. Chou mollier and cabbage were declared still less reliable. Maize was admitted to be a good feed, but unlikely in the Canterbury climate to give sufficient feed from the date when the soil was warm enough and 'the frost!-freedo(m sure} enough for seedtime. Tares and peas were considered very acceptable but for two reasons. If grazed off there was liable to be considerable waste, particularly with peas, which were not very much relished till they were podding. AntT if they were mown there was the labour trouble. The farmers were inclined to pay some attention to tares, and were pleased to learn that seed will apparently this year be abundant and reasonably cheap. Japanese millet also received favour, and Instructor Tennent said Central Otago could ripen the seed, thus reducing the high cost if quantities were wanted. On the whole the debate did not remove the urgent need of saving the turnip &hd : .rape crops from their destructive insect enemies. Interesting reference was made to alternative “cash” crops in place of wlieat. Mr Cockayne, in recommending linseed, said the price of the crop was good and was unlikely to be reduced seriously even if the crop were increased ten-fold. This crop, of course, in addition to supplying the New Zealand oil factories gives a residue valuable in stock feeding. So also (does sugar beet, the waste beet pulp after extraction of the juice being a recognised stock food in America. It was encouraging, therefore, to hear Mr Cockayne strongly recommend the sugar beet industry for Canterbury. He said that wherever the Americans grew sugar beet they were prosperous, and his suggestion that the meat factories take on the work seems to solve the factory problem. Sugar beet sells at about 30s per ton. The sugar mangold family (to which sugar beet belongs is well known for its immunity from insect and other troubles. We expect to see these very important suggestions kept well alive in the future by the leaders among our Canterbury farmers. As Mr Cockayne said, we need to grow our own sugar almost as much as we need to grow our own wheat.