POTATO DISEASE.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 760, 8 March 1910, Page 8

POTATO DISEASE.

BENEFITS OF SPRAYING. V,Speaking in Nelson" the ""'other day on the subject of. potato. disease, which .farmers'were complaining Was again prevalent, Mr. T. W. lCirk, : of^tlie,, department of Agriculture, 'advised potafo-growers. not. to trust in Providence • but to spray their crops. Because-they had' had a couple of dry seasons, i many farmers had ceased to-take preventive measures. The : disease was certainly much less in a dry yejfr than iii 'ajiumi(( one, ,but' at tho same , time'. Providence gave most assistance to those who helped themselves, and..had';evidently decided not to do the farmer's "'work for him. . Apart, from the actual prevention 'of diieajey those: who sprayed 'good reward. 1 Thife was fully jshdwn; in '; the "letter;,; published in last year's Departmental report. If more information, was wanted lie' would refer them to -the ,experiments conducted last year on' Mr. Thomas' Davis's farm in Canterbury at an approximate cost of 30s. an ,'acre for material and labour.' .There were four plots planted, ■ and oiie-linlf of each was - sprayed, whilevthe; other was not.' On No. l plot the yield of potatoes showed on the portion wnich had,.been spray sd a -gain of marketable potatoes amounting to. 5' tonsv 9cwt. • lqr.: 231b., '.This ;had been procured :for a total - expenditure of '305., ; a profitable investiheht, surely. The gain in the other plots was: No. 2 plot, 2 tons 3c«:t. 81b. per acre; No.-3 plot, 2 tons Scwt. l!)lb per 'acre;. and ~No:. 4' plot, 3 tons; Hcwt. 3qr. .'sld. Spraying systematically. two of three times made' the potatoes 'much more robust, and was as good I'as an insurance, policy.,' l