ON THE LAND.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 13745, 9 May 1908, Page 8

ON THE LAND.

PROFIT FROM SHEEP. Me. CcTHP.Er.T Fethekstokhatjch, in Ilia PastoraJists' Review, gives some idea, of the profits of sheep-raising in Australia. Ho says:-"Th© question is one to which I have given much consideration for many years, and one which I have discussed at length with many experienced pastoralists and with more than one manager of our large pastoral institutions. One of the latter, a gentleman who had tho returns ot a very largo number of pastoral properties to guide him, told me that these returns, covering a long period of years, showed no more than an annual net return of 03 per sheep. Although the estimate of 9s a head has been criticised as out of the way high, yet the figures given in tlx; December issue in an interesting article by "Camden' show very clearly that high-class sheep -under existing conditions return even more than 9s a head. Camden gives actual wool returns from some eight flocks, which average over 10 a sheep. If the net returns for sale sheep are added to this we will have a gross return of at least 13s a head, or somewhere about lis net. In estimating the net annual return from a sheep it goes without saying that an average must be taken over a term of, say, riot less than 20 years, or what, is aptly termed "year in and year out." At tho same time the prospects for wool values art better to-day tfcan they have been any time during the last 30 years, and tho same can be said for the prospect of sheep values, whether for fats or stores, so that it is only reasonable to strike a higher average j in estimating the annual net return from a ! sheep to-day "year in and year out" than would have been struck 20 or oven 10 years ago. At the present time sheep-growing is on a much more stable basis than it was. The weight of the fleece has increased marvellously. Instead of 61b, the average is now only a fraction tinder 81b, while 91b clips are quite common, and 101b not considered anything worthy of comment. Then the frozen | and canned meat export trade has not only added very considerably to the value of the carcase, but it has assured us of an excellent minimum value for our surplus stock. Again, tho . good markets existing for tallow and for pelts are factors not to |be ignored. Under all these improved conditions, then, 1 consider I am well within the mark at to-day putting the average annual net value from a sheep at from 4s 6d a head on non-fattening country to 5s a head on fattening country, year iii and ' yea;* out, or for, say, the next 20 years. If wool maintains even its present value (January 1, 1903) then my estimate will | prove to be a low one, for if asked for an estimate based on existing conditions, I j would say 6s to 6s 6d. On a well-managed property in a failaverage fattening district, and of course with good sheep, J. am of opinion that tho surplus stock should pay all expenses except carriage of wool and interest, leaving the wool free; that- is to say, tho owner's net profit should be tho value of the wool clip, less carriage and commission. On a similar property where the surplus stock could not. be fattened I would deduct 6d a head; that is to say, I consider tho cost of management, etc., would not bo covered by tho proceeds of the surplus stock, but would cut into tho wool return to the extent of 6d a head. In this connection tho fact must not be lost sight of that 'most fattening' country is subject to drought, while tho non-fatten-ing country for the most part is blessed with a good rainfall. Still, as against tho dry years in the outside country, we have to count on the adjuncts of excessive wet in the rainfall country, viz., worms, etc., and consequent loss of increase. The cost of management, exclusive of wool carriage, should bo covered by £83 a . thousand, or, as cost of shearing and of all labour has increased very considerably i of late years, wo may perhaps pub it at £98 a thousand, or about Is 9d a sheep.. For illustration, let us tako a flock of 15,000 sheep on tho plains, of which 6000 arj breeding owes, these should give a yearly increase of 78 [X' cent., less no lambs at. all pne yen in five, reducing tho yearly increase to- 60 per cent, "year in and year out.'" The decrease all over may be put at per cent, on tho 15,000. There would, therefore, be 60 per cent, on 6000 ewes surplus stock to sell, less 3g per cent, on 15,000, giving the owner, roughly, .an average of 4000 sheep to sell every year. Eight shillings a head will bo a moderate estimate to take for sale sheep "year in I and year out" for the next 20 years; this will give £1600 a year towards cost of management of 15,000 sheep. No<v, at £88 a thousand, the cost of management will run into £1320, leaving a margin of £280 to the good, while allowing for no lambing in ! one year out of five. It may be said that (there will probably be actual loss of sheep as well as no lambing in One year out of five, and also depreciation on the wool. I should have stated that I am figuring on country with a fairly consistent rainfall, though not assured. I am not figuring on outside dry country. Sheep-farming on any country, except assured rainfall country, is more or less of a gamble; on outside dry country there is no more or less at allit is all " more." On country such as I have been figuring on, good sheep, well looked after, should cut 91b all round, and 7£d a lb is a moderate estimate for the net. price the wool would fetch year in ana year out this would give a wool return of 5s 7£d a sheep. The 7£d over my estimate can be put as a set-off against loss of sheep and wool in the one year in five bad seasons. I thinik, therefore, on the whole, that I have made my case good in giving 5s as a fair net return for a_ sheep if depastured on fattening country in a moderately safe rainfall country. Closely allied with the question of "What will a sheep return?" is "What is the value of the land required to carry a sheep?" Some five years ago I discussed | this with .more than one manager of -our large < pastoral institutions, and their estimate was that a sheep could not carry more than £3. That is, the sheep and the land required to carry said sheep should not tofml in value more than £3. Taking a she* p to average from 8s to 10s in value, this left the land at from £2 10s to -£2 12s an acre. This question as to tho value of tho land required to carry a sheep was much in' evidence at the late Peel River Estate closer settlement inquiry. I have tho printed evidence before me, and I find that the Crown valuers put sheep to the acre land on that estate from 35s to 60s per acre. One of the company's valuers put sheep to the acre land at 50s; all the others put it at 60s an acre. At £3 an acre for the land a sheep has to carry at least £3 10s on its back, that 13 to say, each sheen has to pay interest on £3 10s. Now, will" my estimated net return of 5s a sheep justify a purchaser in investing on a property : costing him £3 10s a head for tho sheep and land? I think it will if wo take a flock of 15,000 sheep running on 15,000 acres; the cost will, at £3 10s, be £52,500, but to this must be added £1000 for horses, cows, and plant, etc., bringing the purchase up to £53,500. At 5s a head net return the owner would receive £3750 a year, or about 7 per cent., and he would have a home and ordinary living expenses for himself and family. This seems to me good enough, and if my figures are correct a purchaser is justified in giving £3 an acre for good sweet sheep to the acre land, within reasonable distance of a railway and market, and inside a moderately good rainfall. , . ■ Whether my figures and estimates are correct or not, the fact remains that such, land as I have described cannot bo acquired at, the present time at anything under 60s an acre. _______ THE PROBLEM OF FARMING. Fletcher says that "the greatest problem in farming is that of maintaining the fertility of the soil, which is its power to prodtico crops. It is not mere plant food—it is water, air, sunlight, plant food, temperature, soil, bacteria, and all the other factors and conditions wuieh make a soil habitable for plants. It is concerned with the texture ol the soil as much as with its richness, and its water-moving power as much as its composition. Plant food is but one of the many conditions necessary to the growth of crops, and often it is the least- essential condition. The fertility of the soil is the sum of all the conditions that make it possible for the seed to sprout, the blade to spread, and the ear to ripen. It is the inherent power of the soil to produce crops." /; . ■