WHEAT OR NO WHEAT ?

Otago Witness, Issue 3655, 1 April 1924, Page 12

WHEAT OR NO WHEAT ?

Tho wheat question, in so far as the fixing of guaranteed prices for next season’s wheat is concerned, is “ down and out.” The Government is being weaned from price-fixing of produce slowly, and wheat-larmers can now repudiate the assertion that they are being spoon-fed. North Island interests, no doubt, have screwed up the Cabinet to act, as the former can import wheat cheaper to-day from Australia than the South island can afford to supply it, It is as well to realise that the wheat shortage is no myth. The statistician's figures show that there are over 69,000 less acres in wheat this season than last; and we know that the average return per acre is comparatively a low one. The acreage in oats, too, is low, the decrease being estimated at more than double that of wheat. It is safe to say that we are well over two and a-quarter million bushels of wheat short of last year s returns, while a shortage of any one cereal usually inclines people to take heavy toll of the others. If they, too, are in but moderate supply —and we know they are not plentiful — the position becomes interesting indeed. One good feature facing wheat-growers is the fact that the Government has come to a decision at this time of the year. The position of“ wheat-growing from the paper point of view is not, we think, so black as has been painted. The statistical position is not against farmers, and if only ‘‘ wheat-growing" lands were seeded by skilled farmers, and not by men who want a cut at guarantees, etc., regardless of the quality of the land, the net returns might be satisfactory enough. The New Zealand Herald’s comments on the position will appeal to many : “ The Government’s decision to terminate the arbitrary protection of wheat-growing has been accepted so pleasantly that the Cabinet must now be regretting its hesitation in facing the issue. There have been mild protests from a few spokesmen of the wheat-farmers, but the Minister for Agriculture has had nothing to answer except doleful predictions of curtailed sowings and low prices, and has disposed of them with arguments that have been used consistently for several years to demonstrate the fallacy of the methods now il’scredited by all parties. The facts are ihcontestable, for the final result of the embargo method has been the smallest harvest for many years, so that when the country’s need for foreign wheat is greatest domestic prices are far above the world’s parity, and importation is prevented by absurd restrictions. In respect of wheat-growing New Zealand is out of step with the world. While the great producing countries have been steadily increasing their production the dominion has been reducing its wheat area. An instructive survey of the Qpsition has been received from the International Institute of Agriculture [This was published last week.—Ed. O.W.J Dealing with the great wheat-producing countries, exclusive of Russia, it shows that the area harvested has increased enormously. For the five pre-war years the average was 190 million acres: for the last five years the average has been 208 million acres, with the record of 213 millions in the last season. New Zealand’s excellence has been exactly the reverse. The average area in the five years before the war was 241,000 acres: for the last five years the average has been 235.000 acres, with the low record of 185,000 acres for the last harvest. Another striking feature of the world-wide survev is that the 192524 harvests produced exceptionally plentiful yields in all the' great wheat countries—an average of 16 bushels to the acre, against 141 bushels in the prevails fiye vears. Canada had the heaviest vield—2l bushels to the acre. These figures are a striking commentary on the complaint that, wheat-growing in New Zealand is unprofitable. Records extending- over half a century show that the yield has never fallen below 18 bushels to acre, while the average from 1919 to 1923 was 31 bushels, and even this season, when climatic conditions have been abnormally unfavourable, the yipid exceeds 23 bushels. Since Canadian farmers can flourish on land producing -an average of 13 bushels to the acre there must he some ser’ous fault in New Zealand if its farmers mount make wheat prv on 30 bushel land, with a generous measure of protection against foreign competition.”

Ihe know from experience that, farmers who adhere to a wise system of rotating crons welcome the time when wheat is sown in its proper rotation. There are sentimental as well as good business reasons why it is n pleasure to grow wheat, but sentiment is killed dead i r others come in after he has groww a bumper cron and levy toll out of alt reason. Mnnv who handle the wheat make good profits ere the consumers get the loaf, and this tends to snuff out would-be wheat-growers.