ON FARMING PROGRESS

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30296, 23 November 1963, Page 7

ON FARMING PROGRESS

PROMPTED by recent reA marks in these pages about the progress made in North Canterbury farming during the period that Mr E. G. Smith has been with the Department of Agriculture in Rangiora, a Mid-Canterbury farmer Mr M. S. Turton, has written to “The Press’’ in the following terms: “I think- I could say that I have a fair knowlerge of the South Island from Blenheim to Invercargill and I have watched with great interest during the last 30 odd years the tremendous improvement in the farmlands of this wonderful country of ours.

"Several things have brought about this great change. Economic conditions have, of course, played a major part, but another point is that the farmer today is prepared to listen to the suggestions of his son and put these into practice—the Young Farmers’ Club -has done a wonderful job. He will also give his son more responsibility in the running of the farm and last, but not least, will give him a stake in the property before it comes to the time for dad to retire. “But possibly those who are responsible for the greatest change in our farmlands are the agricultural advisers and Lincoln College staff men, etc. Quickly to my mind comes names like Sandy McPherson, who was in Ashburton (now in Dunedin). Bill Stafford, retired from the department and now in Timaru, and many of the calibre of Bill Smith who are too numerous to mention, and those who are following in the footsteps of these men and also doing a great job.

“Before the application of lime and super and the advice that has been available to us in recent years some of our land was almost in the dust bowl category. Thanks to our climate and certified seeds, etc., we have the greatest grasslands in the world. This

is proved by our sheeip, cattle and horses and our cost of production per acre. “Now. sir, do you think that majority of farmers, who have been guided over the years by these advisers, give them the credit that is due to them. One is apt to forget and take it all as a matter of course.

“Getting off the beam a little, I have often thought that a farmer should run his farm like a business and put a small sum aside for research into livestock problems. They could be paid into a pool and subsidised from funds of our Meat and Wool Boards. This farmer research money could be treated as a business does advertising and be deductible for income tax. Today we expect too much from the Government and the boards, and although the farmer contributes, not enough, to my mind, is being done for research on the stock side. “I do not want to be critical of our Wool and Meat Boards. They have done well in the promotion of wool and in developing new markets for meat, but to my mind they must play a major part in stock research and stem the flow of our best scientists, who leave this country for better positions overseas.

“How does the proportion of money we spend on research compare with that of Australia? If we had a record of our secret stock losses it would be staggering. "Possibly we have had too much headline news about D.D.T. What if selenium was not procurable how much would our production fall then?

“Today we cannot farm to full capacity without the scientist and what goes with it.’’

(The writer of this letter, incidentally, pays a generous tribute to what “The Press" is doing today and has done in the past in aiding the progress of Canterbury farming).