FARM LAND VALUES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18455, 19 July 1923, Page 12

FARM LAND VALUES.

MISCHIEVOUS CAMPAIGN.

.PRODUCTION THE REAL TEST

HOW YIELDS MAY BE INCREASED.

There has been a great deal of talk lately on the subject of .whether farming pays as a business proposition, or whether it does not. There are a good mar.y people who can use figures to show that practically all farmers are work.r.g year after year at a dead loss. There are men who calmly assume that all dairying land costs £100 an acre; that it requires two acres of such land to carry a cow; that this class of land requires 7cwt. of fertilisers costing £12 a ton each year, and that generally speaking, the expense of, keeping and milking a cow amounts to about £22, while her yield in butter-fat does not exceed £15; therefore each cow means a loss of £7 per year. Of course figures like these are quite conclusive to these who uso them, and may convince some who wish to be convinced, that farming is a philanthropic affair and is not governed in any way by financial consideration. If these figures are anything near true, they go to prove that the average farmer, besides being the most generous of mortals, is something of a wizard, for while some people may presume to doubt figures when presented in a certain way, there are none who can deny the fact that New Zealand fanners are averagely in a sound financial position, and a good proportion of them arc actually prosperous, which, of course, would be impossible if they were working at a loss.

The fact of the matter is that a certain class of people for some particular reason, and others for no particular reason, have raised tho cry that New Zealand farms are valued far too high, and .-laturaLly they base their idea of values on the English standard. There are only a very few farms in New Zealand which have ever been sold at £100 an acre, and thess, as we have often pointed out, are usually small farms on which the value of improvements, such as dwelling house, miking sheds and machinery, stables and barns either equals or exceeds the value of the land without taking into consideration the probability of such land having a possible value for cutting-upinto surburban sections.. It may be pointed out, too, that, curiously enough, most of the men. who gave up to or over £100 an acre, are, by keeping good stock and by following good farming methods, working sucK land at a profit. Some men who paid a big price for land, or rather who promised to pay a big price, and weighed themselves' down with heavy mortgages, have gone under, but even some of these have survived tho financial crisis. _ If there is any lesson to be taught by highpriced land it is that in most cases it is much more profitable than low-priced land, badly worked, or not worked at all. There ,is more financial risk to the individual, and certainly more danger to the State in men holding large areas of lowpriced land which they cannot or will not: work, or only'work partially, than there is in "all the high-priced land ever sold throughout the length and breadth of this country. : The dear-land Jeremiah argues that it takes two acres of high-priced land to carry a cow. As a rule, it takes little more than one acre of such land, and thero is no iteason why such land should' not- be made to carry with the aid of moderately, intensive farming • two cows to the acre. Two cows to the acre on £100 an acre land makes the land charges ■ no dearer- than two acres to the"'Cowland £25 per acre, and there is no reason whatever why practically all the " dairying land in the Dominion should not carry a grea,t deal more stock than it is carrying now. ■ There has been a great movement all through New Zealand to increase the butter-fat production of the dairy cow, and in some cases it has been increased a hundred per cent. There should be a similar movement to increase the stock-carrying- .capacity of dairying, land.' It is bad business to be content to give up two acres, or, in some cases, three or four acres of land, to the keeping of one cow— . business lor the State and usually bad for the farmer, because it means keeping the soil to a low standard of production. It would certainly be better for everybody concerned if the people who are campaigning against the high price of land would turn their energies into > a campaign against low production. There is just as much sense in fighting for the two cow to the acre farm as there is in holding' up 3001b. of butter-fat as the standard yield of a dairy cow. Two cows to the acre is by no means an impossible standard. It, could be reached on the great bulk of arable dairy farms. • It'• would mean of course the growing of crops to supplement pasture and when once this was started systematically, the benefits would soon be apparent. We have seen during the past year in Now Zealand an extraordinary increase in the output of our dairy produce due almost entirely to the fact that bountiful Bummer rainfall kept up an abundant supply of pasture feud for dairy cows. - But by grouping a*, fair .proportion of succulent crops onr farmers could readily raise more feed for their dairy cows each year than is given by. nature through an exceptional rainfall, and it is this growing of extra food which will-"do more to settle the dear land problem.than anything else. It Fs accepted as a : fact that averagely it requires £80. worth of land to carry a cowhand it should also be accepted as a fact that-half the area usually employed could be made to serve the same purpose, instead of three acres of poor pasture, two acres of good pasture, or one and a half acres of good pasture, including a small area of fodder and toot crops, or instead of one acre of good land to one cow, enough root and fodder hay or ensilage with high-class pasture to carry two cows to the acre. It is often held up to those who advocate the growing of supplementary crops that the cost is too great, but this is a mere ; assertion. The cost of growing extra feed crops would be more than made up yeirly by the increase in production fiora the soil, and besides this it is undoubted that bv systematic cultivation and by rotation the fertility of the laud could bo greatly increased.