Economic Interest Of Aerial Farming

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29931, 19 September 1962, Page 14

Economic Interest Of Aerial Farming

(New Zealar.a Press Association)

WELLINGTON, September 18.

Because of the darkening trade clouds threatening New Zealand it was in the national interest to reduce aviation taxation levied on agricultural aviation firms, said Wellington economist (Mr M. Y. Walls) todav.

He wag making submissions to the Committee of Inquiry into airport and airways dues on behalf of Airland (New Zealand). Ltd., an aerial farming company using heavy aircraft in which Rural Aviation, James Aviation, and Field Air are partners. "The country is now straining every effort to find new markets for our primary produce in the face of likely serious restrictions in our old markets," said Mr Walls. "Economic experts state that, if the United Kingdom and Western Europe are closed to us through E.E.C. trade barriers and if North America continues to have quotas against our dairy products. we must increase our export trade to the East “The effective demand in the East is generally low for our—to them—high-cost luxury products. Although *grieultural aviation dues are low compared with some other aviation operations, surely today’s circumstances dictate that these fees be reduced to the lowest possible figure or preferably eliminated." he said. If aviation dues increased, said Mr Walls, lite prospect in the immediate future must be for less fertiliser to be used by farmers. The result would be a lower income to the country and loss to the company he represented. The contemplated increase

m aviation taxation of about 3s a ton for lime and superphosphate—if carried into effect—would have to be passed on to the farmer at a time when he was meeting a fall in his farm income. Although it was agreed in principle that airport and airways dues should be progressively increased to the user. Mr Walls urged that no increase be levied until the economic circumstances of the aviation industry had been “very carefully considered.” The costs to some farmers and country areas could jump markedly if heavy agricultural aircraft iperations were abandoned, said M. Walls. The operations of heavy aircraft were cheaper where much high-climbing was necessary, in many cases where round-about routes had to be used to get to farm areas, where the possibility e* making farm airstrips was non-existent of prohibitively costly, where the terrain was very difficult, and where convenience was a prime factor, as in cases where there was no staff to service fertiliser loads. Commenting that Airland 'New Zealand). Ltd., used heavy aircraft. Mr Walls said the firm was important. Its work helped the national income and improved the bal-| ance of payments position | because of the increased ex-1 ports it helped to create. ,1