The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1920. WHEAT GROWING.

Southland Times, Issue 18857, 24 June 1920, Page 4

The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1920. WHEAT GROWING.

In another column we publish a letter from a farmer—we judge the writer to be a farmer—giving estimates of the cost of growing vihcat in Southland. We have no intention at this stage of combating figures, but there arc several points in his calculations that are a little obscure, and upon them we would like additional information. Ho gives in detail the cost of putting an acre of land, valued at £2O an aens in wheat. He begins with an item of £l, the rent of an acre of land at the value he postulates, and later in his table he allows interest on £2O at the rate of five per cent. We confess that we do not understand the reason for this double charge upon the capital value of the land, if ihc land is worth £2O an acre, that . price includes the buildings upon it. By that we mean that in a farm of a hundred aerts, where the total value would be £2OOO, the cost of the house and buildings on the property would be included in that ( figure. Now, the payment of £1 per acre givis him possession of the farm for the year and whether it be on lease, under mortgage or freehold free of any charges, the item of “rent” has the same effect. The inclusion of “Interest at five per cent,” therefore, seems to be a double charging of the same item. We would be pleased to have our correspondent's explanation of there two items. The item of 5s an acre for land tax strikes us as being ample, ant- presupposes a property of fairly large proportions. The various items in the prepat ation of (he soil seem to be very reasonable, though doubtless they vary in some districts. We find that manuring is put down at 30s an acre, which seems to us to be fairly substantial, and we would like to ee this item discussed more fuliy in its relation to the fast item of £1 for exhausj lion of soil. It is well known, of course, ! that wheat draws upon the virtues of the soil to a considerable extent, but where there has been extensive manuring for a I wheat crop, the farmer must measure the j exhaustion of the soil by the difference be* | tween its condition before he commenced | cultivation and after he has taken his crop | out. The fact that more manure may be | necessary before another crop is put in docs not entitle him to put the cost of such manuring down to the wheat crop. That cost will go against the next year's operations. The charge that can be set against tbt exhaustion of the soil under such con- ! ditions has been the subject of discussion ' over a term of many years, but the exponent e of practical farmers is always of value ' in the consideration of this important aspect | of farming and we would, therefore, welcome some further information upon it. Our correspondent goes on to mention the oil er charges in connection with the house--1 ho'd expenses, but there must he a careful I distinction made between the purely domesj tic charges and the cost of food and lodg- | ing for those people who are engaged | directly in the actual working of the wheat ! crop. We do not suggest that the items ’ chargeable to the cost of wheat production ’ should be confined strictly to the men ’ working in the paddock, because where . machinery, horses and other plant are necessary to the growing of the crop the 'labour for their operation must include the care of (hem during (he year, and it is a fair thing to allow for depreciation, which | our correspondent has not done. By basing hi- revenue on a return of thirtyfive bushels : to the acre he has certainly used a figure that is over the average, but it seems to us that the items in his detailed account 1 to which we have drawn attention require further explanation before the question of : the probable yield need be considered. Our correspondent in his references to our remarks upon the subject of wheat, growing J should not overlook the point that a factor in our recommendation to farmers to grow wheat was that the evidence before us at ; the present time suggested the probability j of a world market price much higher than | the price offered by the government. Al- ! though the basis upon which the New Zealand wheat grower is to be permitted to take advantage of any higher price has not been definitely settled yet, there can be little doubt that if, as Canadian farmers have forecasted, wheat goes to four dollars a bushel, the grower in this country will receive something' much in excess of 7s 6d. The position at the present time is that he lias been guaranteed a minimum of 7s 6d, 'out that is not necessarily a maximum, and as farmers in Canterbury and North Otago are growing wheat on that basis on land valued at more than £2O, expecting

to make a good thing out of it, we think that there is some ground for saying that wheat appears to be a good thing for the man on the land at the present moment.