TOP-DRESSING

Northern Advocate, 15 September 1934, Page 10

TOP-DRESSING

EXPERIENCE OF FARMERS EXCHANGE OF VIEWS. “MANURING IS NECESSARY." “In 1926 Dr. Cockayne estimated that one ton of super, costing £5 on average land, and with good management, produced butterfat worth £lB. At that time the pay-out was 1/4 per lb. of butterfat so that £lB represented 2701b5. Now that the pay-out has fallen to 8.568 pence and the price of super is £4, the return is worth only £9 12/9. In 1926 the profit from one ton of super was £l3. whereas now the profit is only £5 12/9. At £4 per ton, the cost per unit is 1/9 1-3 for 4446 per cwt. super, whereas ground Nauru rock, of 80 per cwt, at £4 5/, shows a cost of only 1/03- While the latter is considerably slower in its action than super, it does not differ widely in this respect from the various ground mineral phosphates, such as phosfull, solphas, etc. In regions with a heavy rainfall and soils inclined to sourness, its action is ameliorated.”

With those remarks, Mr J. C. Marsh opened a discussion at a meeting of the Kaitaia branch of the Farmers’ Union on Wednesday night on “The influence of low prices on top-dress-ing.” Cannot Be Neglected. Mr Marsh said that butterfat had to drop to an impossible price before top-dressing every season could be neglected. Other costs were still up and the balance available for topdressing was shrinking every year. But this was one of the few purposes for which money could be legitimately borrowed, provided the rate of interest would not wipe out the profit received. That position was still far away.

Mr Stewart said that Mr Marsh had not taken into consideration freight and cartage, which would bring the cost of super up to £5. On top of that there was the cost of labour in distributing the fertiliser. Land differed very much in its response to treatment, and on his farm super was useless without lime, which added to the expense. Top-dressing was an absolute impossibilit3 with a large majority of farmers. If they borrowed, the difference in returns would not pay interest on the loans. Mr J. Cowie: “If we don’t top-dress, the farms will go back and the returns will diminish.” He believed topdressing paid even when prices for buterfat were low. What he would like to know was what quantities should be used to get the most profitable results. Will Always Give Return. Mr A. G. Bell quoted a successful farmer as having said that the poorer a farmer was the more he had to topdress. Unless the bottom fell out of the market altogether a farmer could not afford to neglect this work which always gave a return above the expenditure.

Mr R. G. Brien said that his view was thpt a man who stopped topdressing, especially on hill country might as well walk off his farm. He would be very sorry to stop topdressing himself. Once this treatment of the land was started it had to be continued and if stopped after a few years’ development, it was very difficult to bring the grass back to the right standard. He was a great believer in basic super. He had tried guano with the lesult that the pastures went back. He was supposed to have the best perennial rye in the Far North though he had never sown any. He gave basic super credit for that. The English Grasses.

Mr W. Johnson said the question before them was whether top-dressing paid and there were many factors to consider. One fertiliser would do well on one class of land and badly on another. His own property on .Church Road was hill country and had been grazed since it was first sown 40 or 50 years ago. His was an entirely different proposition to new bush country. Different manure and ten times as much was needed as when land had only been a few years in grass. His land had at one time the best English grasses in the north but with continuous grazing by sheep these grasses gradually went and now the land would not grow even danthonia. It took five or six years topdressing to bring back any sign of English grasses. Much depended upon the kind of stock grazed and it was easier to get results, by grazing with cattle than with sheep. He had tried different manures'

With good pasture a small amount of manure was sufficient, but with poor land manuring for about six years was required. A farmer must top-dress but the question was: “Where is he to get the money.” Harrowing Also Useful,

Mr Marsh said one year could be missed with top-dressing, but after that the law of diminishing returns would operate. If 1 cwt. of phosphate manure would keep the cows up to standard it would be necessary to apply more to improve the herd. Phosphate manures were most important. Potasli was necessary but was maintained to a certain degree by the grass voided by the animals and what was trodden down. Lime taken out by the cows bad to be replaced. The opinion had been expressed that the continuous use of superphosphates increased the acidity of the soil but in one case it had been used for 80 years without this effect. Whatever the price, one ton of fertiliser to the acre must be used to prevent pastures deteriorating. Mr Cowie concluded the discussion by saying that failing top-dressing much could be accomplished with harrowing.