FACTORS HOLDING UP IRRIGATION PROGRESS

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28950, 18 July 1959, Page 4

FACTORS HOLDING UP IRRIGATION PROGRESS

The irrigation committee of the House of Representatives had stated that farmers on existing irrigation schemes had been (a) wasting water, (b) subdividing more slowly than was “desirable,” and (c) slow in investing their capital in full irrigation development, said Mr H. G. Morris, president of the Ashburton-Lyndhurst Irrigation Development Association, in a statement. > “Does the committee not Realise that in the Ashburton-Lynd-hurst scheme at the peak watering period there has been no water to waste,” asks Mr Morris. "When this occurs an irrigation scheme is fully developed. “Waste of water is more likely in small areas where little labour is available. Subdivision into smaller holdings would not increase the efficient use of water, as for maximum efficiency in an irrigation scheme water should be used 24 hours a day. This is possible only where labour to work shifts is available and a farm must be a reasonable size to be able to employ that labour. As yet no automatic irrigation for border dykes has been devised. So-called automatic schemes are merely pre-set and therefore erratic in operation. ‘■Farmers are hesitant about' developing their farms as fully irrigated ones for the following reasons:

**(1) The high incidence of taxation which leaves little capital for land preparation, fencing and purchase of Increased numbers of stock. "(2) Doubts about the security of tenure due to penal death duties on highly developed properties. These ddubts will in no way be lulled by the committee’s paragraphs on compulsory purchase. "(3) Doubts about feed utilisation and stock health. Little is yet known about efficient feed utilisation and stock health under conditions of maximum stocking on a commercial basis. It may be neither practical nor economic to have 100 per cent irrigation on one unit There is no animal research station in an irrigated area. "(4) Doubts about the cost and

availability of water. The committee recommends that a variable water rate be struck. There is no doubt that this would be a rising rate giving farmers little chance to estimate their costs for water. If sufficient water is not available farmers cannot stock to full capacity. Inestimable Value “The committee notes that the evolutionary process and full development by the farmer himself are slow. To anyone with any knowledge of the development of the Ashburton-Lyndhurst scheme this slowness has been of inestimable value. It would be hard to imagine the cost of the mistakes that would have been made if the scheme had been fully, developed in five years only. “As the scheme now stands after 14 years, out of an irrigable area of 64,000 acres there are 17,151 acres under border dkyes and about 6000 acres are wild flooded. As the scheme was designed the quantity .of water available is sufficient to vtater only half the irrigable area on a 24 hour day basis, -so it -is i evident that air Ady the icheipis ft Yiighly developed. . / ■ ' “Under existing conditions 'the State, rather than the farmer, benefits from the increased production from irrigated farms,” said Mr Morris “Increased production does not necessarily mean an increase in net profit which would be a very real stimulant for increased irrigation.”