"CANTERBURY, WAKE UP!"

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 17814, 13 July 1923, Page 3

"CANTERBURY, WAKE UP!"

MORE PRODUCTION NEEDED. We have received from Mr A. Macpherson, hon. organiser of the Canterbury Lucerne Campaign Committee, an interesting and detailed account of the relative position of the North and South Islands in the matter of exports. The writer's observations extend over a period of 40 years m Canterbury—in the late 70' s and the SO's, as a responsible member of the staff of the Australian and .New Zealand l,and Company m South Canterbury, and subsequently as chief officer of the Instructional Division of the Department of Agriculture in the South Island. Mr Macpherson is now engaged on a propaganda for the growing of lucerne to enable Canterbury to keep nearer the North Island in the matter of production. In the course of his article he says:— An official set of figures appeared m the daily papers of May 21st. These were the exports of the North and South Island, tespectnelv, for the vear ending March 31st, 1923, and read as follows: North Island. South Island. £31,470,062. £14,011,183. The North Island draws on the South for its wheat, and a considerable share of its oats, chaff, and potato requirements, and in return we take a certain amount of winter butter, but this would not amount to more than li million in our favour, bringing our exports to less than half the value of the North Island. The superficial observer might content himself with the reflection that the dairy progress of the North is the sole cause of the disparity. But we are sliding back in our sheep figures much more rapidly than the North. The interim figures, just announced, state that the North Island flocks have increased this year by 632,238, and the South by 74,367, and the latter figures are capable of an explanation that shows the increase much more apparent than real—they, are due to smaller killings this season for export. The interim sheep returns for 1923 show the following:-—Marlborough-Nel-son- Westland,' 82.360 decrease; C-nter-bury-Kaikoura, 20,028 increase; Otago and Southland, 136.699 increase. When most of our southern freezing works were built or extended in view ojf "future necessities," the sheep fieures of the province were bigjrer than to-day, as follows over five yearly periods:— 1895 ... ... 5,559,990 1900 ... ... 4.716,262 1905 ... ... 5.240,253 1910 ... ... 5,486,464 Then quite up to-20 per cent, of 1915 ... . ; . 5,341,289 , And in 1922 ... 4,301,8381 ; space was set aside for beef freezing, which industry has practically gone for the time being. The North Island leaves us far behind here ? also, if there should be a revival in beef export. North Island cattle in 1922, "other than dairying." totalled 1,771,487: South Island, "other than dairying,*' 414,681! The following sheep figures may illustrate, not so much how the North Island has advanced, but how we in the South have remained stationary : N. Island S. Island. 1886 ... 5,285,907 9,888,356 1922 ... 12,095,805 10,126,454 Increase in 36 years 6,809,898 238,089 The proportion of stock carried in the two Islands is as follows: N. Island. S. Island. All cattle ... 79.29 20.73 Dairy Cattle 75.87 24.13 Sheep ... 65.00 45.00 It should Bhake our complacency somewhat to read from the official statistics that the province of Auckland exported in 1921-22 £10,314,000 worth to the whole of the South Island's £13,516,1/90. In 1922-23 the difference was widened by approximately one million, but the figures are not pleasing from the South Island viewpoint. Several examples of the adaptability of lucerne to iemedy the position ef affairs are quoted, one an opinion from Mr Bernard Tripp, South Canterbury, another from the experience of Mr Jas. Heasley, Medbury, published in the "Journal of Agriculture," in 1921. Concluding the pamphlet says: "The analysis of Canterbury's position, given simply to show how we are allowing the North Island to outstrip us. We have made no increase in weight of production for export except to a minor extent in dairying for 30 years. It is since then that the breaking up of large estates came into force, and it is worth noting that that policy has failed signally to achieve what was claimed for it, i.e., increased production. Apparently this increase is to be brought about, not so much by legislative remedies, as by the substitution of methods that are taking the dominant place in fnrm practice in most other parts of the world." "Wo want to reduce that spread between 14 and 31 million, and we want to keep our young men here."