THE HIGH COUNTRY RESEARCH IN FARMING, NOT EROSION, URGED

Press, Volume XCIV, Issue 28162, 28 December 1956, Page 6

THE HIGH COUNTRY RESEARCH IN FARMING, NOT EROSION, URGED

[Specially Written for “The Press’’ by

DAVID McLEOD,

“Grasmere “ C(Ul}

Public attention has again been focused on the problem of erosion in the South Island high country by a public statement attributed to Dr. Lincoln Ellison, an American scientist. Dr. Ellison spent a few weeks in New Zealand and had a brief inspection of certain high-country areas. Amongst other things, his statement appeals for more research in the high country. It is time this question was given the prominence it deserves and the issue squarely faced as to what exactly requires investigation. Dr. Ellison says that it needs a wiser head than his to decide what is to be done with the sheepfarmers. That is just the attitude that the sheepfarmers so deeply deplore. Bodies of all kinds are prepared to investigate plant cover and soil erosion (in a sporadic and unrelated manner), but nobody is prepared to investigate sheepfarming. Yet the issue is as clear as crystal—high-country sheepfarming must be adapted to the needs of the land on which it takes place, and nobody is better aware of this than the highcountry farmers. Dr. Ellison implies that there have been no changes in highcountry farming since the early settlement. He is*' impressed by the lack of management of sheep on New Zealand high country.

“Sheep.” he says, “seemed to go practically where they pleased, grazing up the mountain sides as the snow retreated and only coming down again in the fall of the winter.” It would appear that Dr. Ellison had littl§ contact with high-country farmers and obtained his information from persons who have not much knowledge of the subject. Certainly the system of shepherding in individual “bands” is not practised in New Zealand. (Try getting a New Zealand musterer to live alone with his sheep for months on end.) But summer and winter country are carefully selected and one of the important developments of recent times is the increased use of fencing and periodical spelling. The Deer Menace

A most harmful suggestion which has been gaining popularity in this country is reiterated by Dr. Ellison. This is that we can afford to tolerate deer in the high country, provided they are ‘ kept under control.” In America, deer are indigenous, and vegetation became adapted to them many thousand years ago. Deer in New Zealand forests have done and are doing irreparable harm, and chamois, grazing all the year round on the plants which are most vulnerable to damage, are helping soil erosion to start at the highest level. The inference that we can afford the pleasant luxury of a popular sport and do without the income from a highly productive industry shows how ill scientists can reason when personal prejudice is involved. That Dr. Ellison’s view of highcountry farming is not shared by other investigators is shown by the remarks of Dr. Merton Love, another errminent scientist, from Davis, California, who has spent four months as a Fullbright scholar attached to Lincoln College. His particular study is “range management,” the American term for pastoral farming in mountain country. Dr. Love has travelled widely throughout the high country, working with runholders and departmental officers. His opinion of the attitude of the runholders to their responsibilities and the progress being made towards improvement is in direct contradiction to that expressed by Dr. Lllison. One cannot escape the conclusion that much of a visitor’s

opinions depends upon what h is shown. Profits Ploughed Back The high-country run holder, have experienced a short periJ of prosperity since the war. it striking how much of these profits have been ploughed back land which is not their own pro. perty. They have put up modem and efficient buildings; they have provided amenities for their staffs; they have spent money on the eradication of noxious weeds Most important of all they have experimented widely with the improvement of the tussock country from a grazier's point of view. They have realised that if their industry is to survive they must be pioneers of new techniques. They must be able to prove by results that their occupa. tion of the mountains can be maintained without further detri. ment to the plant cover. In actual fact they believe that, by new methods, they will be able to im. prove the present state of the country. They have not hesitated to use the aeroplane to surface-sow and topdress, experimenting at great expense with schemes which, of necessity, must be only occa. sionally economic, paving the way for future success. It is a bold man, indeed, who stakes his hardearned profits to try to improve country which carries only one sheep to four or five acres and of which he is only a tenant; yet it is being done all over the high country with a courage which deserves more support. In their attempts to develop new techniques, it is interesting to see what help and support the runholders are getting. The Department of Agriculture has for some years had a few officers based at different places in the high country studying improvement of pasture. These men are recognised and admired by the local farmers, and their efforts have been valiant, though often stultified by lack of support from their own department. In the Mackenzie Country the field officer has developed grasses which are being grown in quantity by the local runholders so that they may be provided with seed for aerial sowing on the hills. Yet this officer cannot extend his work beyond its present scope because he has no assistance with the manuaL labour of weeding and caring for his plot Other bodies, mostly concerned with soil conservation, are doing sporadic work with plant cover in various districts, but there is no direction, no co-ordination, above all. no comprehensive plan. At the New Zealand Grasslands conference at. Lincoln College, the chairman of the High Country Committee, Mr Chapman, wound up his address with an appeal. He said: ‘.‘We are tired of being abused. We are tired of being criticised. We are tired of being told what we should not do. Will not someone make some constructive suggestions about how highcountry sheepfarming should be done?” Although there were present scientists from all parts of the world, including Dr. Elli* son himself, this appeal met with no response.

Research Station Needed Some years ago a committee was set up to' investigate the possibility of getting a full-scale research station set up in the high country. This committee sat at Lincoln College and included some of the best brains in agricultural science, representing the college, the runholders, and all relevant Government departments. This committee collected information on all the work done since research was first carried out in the high country, and it also propared a schedule of problems requiring investigation. Finally, a case was taken to the Government Caucus Committee on Agriculture, and a request made for the setting up of a research station in high country. After not months but years of waiting, it was announced that the Government did not propose to accede to this request. There seems, then, no alternative to the continuation of private research —the backing of their own horse by the owners themselves. It has one prerequisite: the certain knowledge that the horse will start. Every time someone says that the high country—or a portion of it —should be withdrawn from grazing, it is a threat to scratch the horse and throw the whole of the runholders' investment down the drain. How can they continue under such a threat? Give the farmers a period to see what they can do. Guarantee this security of tenure and scientific help. Get in behind them and help them to present this valuable and productive industry, and something constructive will be done, even if they have to bear the cost of it themselves. Let it be repeated again and again. What is needed is not more research into soil erosion, but the beginning of a research into highcountry sheepfarming. The problems are not only those of “cover’; they are those of animal husbandry and land use, economics, and the encouragement of labour. Is it useless to ask again for * research station in the high country to investigate not soil erosion but sheepfarming? As Dr. Ellison himself said, it would not be too much to spend 100 times more than is now being done to preserve the land and the industry which it supports.