Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Low-Cost Grass System Pays Best

examination of the relative profitability of all grass farming and mixed arable farming on a 310 acre hypothetical farm under irrigation was made by Dr. J. D. Stewart and Mr D. A. R. Haslam, of the farm management department at Lincoln College, in a paper presented to the farmers’ conference last week. Dr. Stewart said that the two systems of management had been selected for comparison because they represented two opposed schools of thought in Canterbury. The farm capital, the amount of border-dyking, the carrying capacities and stock performances and the crops grown and their yields were all based on information collected during the irrigation survey. It was assumed that the management efficiency was similar on each farm. Grass Farm

The grassland farm carried the stock for the 12 months of the year on pasture and hay alone. No winter supplements were grown. A pasture life of 14 years under irrigation was allowed with renewal through a summer fallow. Farmers practising this system considered that pasture life under prudent stock management could be indefinite. On the cropping farm linseed, wheat, barley, ryegrass and white clover seed were harvested and forage crops were grown for wintering stock. The stock policy on the grassland farm involved the use of white faced rams, rearing replacements and the sale of surplus two-tooth ewes. On the mixed cropping farm replacements were purchased as two-tooths and all ewes were put to the Down ram. In budgeting the two alternative systems 1963-64 prices and costs were used.

The total capital involved in the grassland farm was £22,752 and on the mixed arable farm £25,330. Total income from the grassland farm was £4978 and total working expenses £2343 and the owner's surplus £1270. On the mixed arable farm total income was up to £6568, but expenses were also high at £4649 and the owner’s surplus was only £399. On the assumptions that had been made, Dr. Stewart said, this illustrated that a low cost system of grassland farming was more profitable than a more costly mixed cropping system. The essence of the former was its low cost structure in relation to total income. Moreovej-, it was using irrigation during

the summer to produce lat< fattened shorn lambs and t< carry all ewe hoggets. Thi mixed arable system involving high expenses require! physical performance to bi high and probably better thai the average irrigation farme on Lismore soil could expect

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19640530.2.86.2

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30454, 30 May 1964, Page 8

Word Count
406

Low-Cost Grass System Pays Best Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30454, 30 May 1964, Page 8

Low-Cost Grass System Pays Best Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30454, 30 May 1964, Page 8