LIVE STOCK AND THE FARM

Southland Times, Issue 22487, 24 November 1934, Page 12

LIVE STOCK AND THE FARM

• (Conducted by ’

W. S. Allan, B. Agr. Sc.)

Items of interest with a view to publication in these columns will be accepted, and any Inquiries accompanied by the name and address of the inquirer, not necessarily for publication, will be answered through these columns. ANSWER TO INQUIRIES “Dairy Farmer” Winton, asks the cause and treatment for sore teats in cows. Sore teats, which occur more or less commonly in cows in most dairy herds, are very troublesome. They render the cows fidgety, and, if very painful are responsible for lessened milk production. They are mainly due to injuries, such as scratches, bruises, treads or laceration by the teeth of a sucking calf.

Some animals, particularly heifers, have a soft, tender skin and the initial injury may be due to rough handling by a careless or unskilled milker. The condition appears to be more prevalent in wet, cold weather, especially if the hands of the milker are wet and dirty. In addition, the condition known as cow pox is frequently followed by a type of “sore teat,” which is very difficult to heal.

The teat may be somewhat reddened at first and the cow resists milking on account of the pain inflicted. On examination the site of the injury will usually be denoted by a sore covered with a scab. There may be a little pus under the scab. In milking, the scab is cracked or partly removed, and the area becomes raw and bleeds.

Owing to the fact that the cows must be milked twice daily, the sore part is constantly irritated and healing cannot progress normally since the covering scab (which is a provision of nature to promote repair) is daily broken or removed. Sometimes the sore partly heals, leaving a crack or fissure which does not respond to treatment: at other times the sore becomes infected with germs which cause death of the parts attacked and an ulcerated wound. Treatment should aim at keeping the parts clean and dry and the scab softened so that it will not readily crack during milking. In milking care must be taken to so grasp the teat as to inflict little or no damage on the sore part. When the teats are very sore it will be found an advantage to immerse them in a vessel containing boracic acid and water or other weak antiseptic. The teat should then be carefully dried with a clean cloth and zinc ointment applied. Glycerine or boric acid, or lanoline, may be used. . When deep cracks form. in .the teat, glycerine and carbolic acid is sometimes effective in promoting healing, but frequently they require special treatment. When the teat is very sore and milking manifestly inflicts considerable pain, the teat sinhon may be used to draw off the milk, but care must be taken to sterilize the tube by boiling before inserting it. COST OF PRODUCTION TWO LARGE ITEMS. INTEREST AND WAGES. (Continued.) The question of cost of production is a vital one for the farmer at the present time. For this reason I have reproduced the radio lecture delivered by Dr I. W. Weston, of Canterbury Agricultural College. This lecture, commenced in last week’s issue, is here completed:— The two largest items of cost are interest and wages. The amount charged for interest on the land stock and working capital is determined by the price paid for the land and stock and by the rate of interest charged. In recent years land has been purchased at as high ar £lOO per acre for dairy land and £3O per acre for good grazing land and as low as £2O per acre or £3 per acre respectively. At 5 per cent interest costs for the land alone will vary from £5 and 30/- per acre down to £1 and 6/- per acre. In these cases costs are so directly and greatly affected by prices paid that it is almost true to say that the best measure of cost is the, price. At least it is true to . say that when capital has once been irretrievably sunk in land, buildings, stock and plant production will be carried on for a period at a price sufficient to cover out of pocket expenses only. The amount charged on the farm for wages and wages of management per man have varied in recent years from as high as £5 to £lO per week to as low as £1 to £2 per week. For a time wages of management may be paid out of capital and wages for hired labour may be reduced to a mere subsistence level. On family farms wages are paid for out of profits and if no profit is obtained production tends to be carried on or even increased. Lastly a distinction must always be made between real costs and money costs. Real costs may be defined as the total quantity of labour, land and materials used un in producing the article concerned, whereas money costs will be the total monetary expenses involved. A reduction in real costs always represents increased efficiency better use of labour and capital and progress. A reduction in money costs alone and not accompanied by a reduction of real costs may be necessitated by fluctuation in the value of the monetary unit used and greatly hinders progress or may even represent the opposite of progress—decline. Some actual examples of costs will now be auoted. About 1918 when the New Zealand Government proposed to fix prices of butterfat at 2/6. per lb. dairy farmers were able to bring forward sufficient farm costs to definitely prove that butterfat cost 2/9 per lb to produce. Since then butterfat has been produced and production increased at prices trending downward from an average of 1/6 to an average of 1/- and finally to as low as Bd. per lb. In successive years wheat growers have proved that wheat cost 7/3, then 5/6 and later still 4/4 per bushel to produce. Some of you will no doubt have ridiculed my own pamphlet where the price reauired to cover costs of wool production on wool country was set down at 1/3 or after certain economies had been effected, 1/- per lb. Yet wool has been produced at 6d. per lb. and Jess. The statement on wool costs was based on actual returns for over -million sheen carried on almost 1 million acres of grazing land and was correct at the time and under the conditions specified. What is the explanation of these differences in costs? Is there any true and absolute cost? It must be apparent from the above discussion that there is no absolute cost. This is a Question of general economies rather than one of individual farm costs. All that the individual farmer can do is to farm extensively when he holds sufficient area and as cheaply and efficiently as possible where small areas are held. The New Zealand farmer is efficient in production and has reduced real costs, and also unfortunately money costs, so low that the English farmer’s costs are being protected by quotas, subsidies and import duties. This

method of protecting a cut in money costs may be necessary but in so far as real costs are concerned, the world remedy lies in those countries which produce farm products relatively less efficiently, increasing their production of other goods and not increasing by protection their production of farm goods as at present. So far as. New Zealand is concerned import duties or subsidies can probably still be competed against but the only farm remedy for quotas appears to be to exchange farm products for goods in other countries. The reason for the breakdown in international trade is a monetary nroblem associated with lack of purchasing power, not overproduction. This is the definite conclusion of a report of a number of the world’s ablest observers. This lack of purchasing power is due in part to a failure to maintain stable monetary conditions and to methods of money creation and at the present time to the prevalence of negative saving. That is those with purchasing power sitting tight and withdrawing their money from either purchase of goods or investment in new production. The remedy appears to be in monetary reform and in prevention of negative saving by employment of the unemployed or else in that I’ttle known and much abused word “planning”—planning not for scarcity, but for plenty.

THE ROYAL SHOW GREAT NATIONAL FESTIVAL, MUCH PREPARATORY WORK. There are few things in this world really worth while, or possessing any substantial significance, which are brought to fruition without a great deal of preparatory work. The Royal Show provides a striking example. This great national annual festival cannot be treated lightly by any who desire success at it, whether in the sphere of mechanics, livestock or products of the soil. Plans must be made well ahead; vision must be displayed, for the field of competition is wide, and only the very best can hope to please the adjudicators. Therein lies one of the manifold advantages of the Show, for, manifestly, the person who, as a prospective exhibitor, is faced with the necessity for thinking and working months in advance of the time when judgment is to be passed upon his efforts must, as a natural corollary apply more or less generally to all his ordinary activities the policy of looking forward. Although it would be open to question to say that all the exhibitors. at the Royal have gained distinction in the particular departments of primary production and so on with which they are identified, it is beyond dispute that the great majority of those whose names regularly appear in the prize schedules are keener and more efficient, and have done better than the average of those engaged in similar operations. That many of the animals seen at the Show are not a credit to the breeds which they represent, or to those responsible for their presence, is frankly admitted; but that fact does not negative the view just expressed. Rather does it indicate that the owners still have much to learn, or, on the other hand, that they enter not with the hope of taking honours so much as with the desire to reap whatever advantages may be forthcoming at the Show stud stock sales. Thousands of city folk attend the Show every year as a matter of routine. They go “for the fun of the thing. Among them are many who, when they are afterwards asked, What was the Show like?” invariably reply, Oh, the same old business.” While it is regrettable, of course, their attitude is not difficult to understand. They are concerned only with those matters which immediately affect them. They earn their daily bread; they have their pleasures, and they are content. They lack the education and the desire to learn about the source of their bread and the fundamental means by which they are enabled to gain their entertainment It is this ignorance which accounts for much of the indifference and the definite hostility which not infrequently are manifested when Governments and Parliaments are called upon to determine problems affecting the welfare of the men on the land, and the multitude of interests intimately linked up with their success or failure. It is, perhaps, too much to expect that the older city folk can be induced to visit the Show with eyes that see not only the obvious, but also something of what lies behind the fixture and all its components; but there is no reason why efforts should not be made to direct the minds of the older scholars at the secondary schools toward a proper regard for the relationship between the producers and the consumers. Practically all the ills from which, as a country we are suffering to-day are attributable to the misfortunes of the men on the land, especially the prolonged period of low prices, and it would be well if some means could be found in connection with the Show to bring that important fact home to the thousands of city residents who will patronize the fixture. Then would they realize that the Show is not only a magnificent spectacle, but also a powerful illustration of the ability, the initiative, the enthusiasm and the determination of men and women who strive not alone for their own material gain, but also for the benefit of the people generally.

VALUATION OF LAND PRODUCTION BASIS RECOMMENDED. LINCOLN BULLETIN. A method of valuing farm lands on a production basis instead of the present unsound methods is explained in last month’s Canterbury Chamber of Commerce Agricultural Bulletin. The bulletin states:— The producing value of any particular farm depends upon the normal net returns that can be obtained from that type of farm. Theoretically the market value of farm land generally should coincide with the capitalized value of the estimated future production therefrom. If a logical and uniform method of valuation is to be established the estimated normal producing value must form the basis of such valuation. In order to arrive at a valuation it would be necessary to adopt some system of classification of lands. The Method of Grading Farm Land. The classification would be first on a broad basis, largely dependent upon what the land was principally suited for—e.g., sheep-farming, dairying, cropping, etc. A further more definite and specific sub-classification would then be necessary. .For example, sheep country might require to be classified as follows: (1) Carrying only dry sheep; (2) Able to maintain its own flock; (3) Selling surplus ewes and wethers; (4) Selling surplus ewes and store lambs; (5) Selling ewes and fat lambs; (6) Fat lamb and wheat country; (7) Fat lamb and dairy country. . Dairying and cropping land could be similarly classified into groups according to carrying capacity, type of crop grown, and yielding capacity. It will be found that although individual methods of management, carrying capacity, and production, vary from farm to farm, the actual main grades of land can be fairly readily and definitely classified by any individual farmer or valuer. At present the Government valuers do actually decide as to what land may be placed in particular grades. Such decisions can be made more authoritative and accurate as definite data are built up by surveys based upon soil, plant cover, farm type, etc.

The Estimated Normal Earning Value for Each Main Grade of Land.

In each main grade of land, the estimated normal earning values can be determined by a consideration of the returns of representative farms of that grade. Based on these results earnings values per acre or per sheep or per cow carried can be calculated and the earning value of other land of a similar grade directly estimated on the basis of its acreage and carrying capacity. As a preliminary to actual publication of results for the various grades of land the foundation data, on which these results are based requires assembling. (a) Prices. The United States which has experienced similar difficulties in regard to land valuation to those which New Zealand has experienced has adopted the following valuation system for mortgage purposes: “Under the Federal Farm Loan Act as amended appraisals are made on the basis of the normal agricultural value of farm property. The principal guide to the determination of normal agricultural value is the earning power of the farm in the hands of an ordinary operator at the level of agricultural prices prevailing during the base period, 1909 to 1914. In gauging earning capacity consideration is given to changing economic or physical conditions affecting the value of farms in the particular area in which the property is located. Such factors include shifting trends in demand for agricultural products, in . types of farming, in population, taxation, and in a wide variety of other items.” Extract from Page 14 of first Annual Report of the Farm Credit Administration, 1933. Since further prices are unknown, the only method is to consider past prices in conjunction with the best estimates that can be made, of future prices. At present as a guide to decision in New Zealand a fifteen-year average may be taken. To eliminate some of the abnormal, effects of the war and post war period an average might be taken of the average of the five years. 1910 to 1914, and the ten years, 1925 to 1934. Prices for all districts can readily be compiled from statistical records of prices already available or from local market reports. On the above basis yearly prices in March at Christchurch, except where otherwise stated, average as follows:— Merino fleece wool, medium to good, 12? d per lb for the season. Half bred, 12? d per lb for the season. Crossbred, lOd. Prime fat bullocks, £lllO/- per head. Prime fat lambs, £1 1/4 per head. Prime fat porkers, 5Jd per lb (January averages). Butterfat per lb. 1/0J for the seagrade Garton oats, 2/3 per bushel. Oatsheaf chaff, £3 per ton. Tuscan wheat, 4/4 per bushel. Barley. 4/- per bushel. Partridge peas, 4/3 per bushel. Per. rye, 3/- per bushel. Italian rye, 2/9 per bushel. Cocksfoot, 51d per lb. Red clover, 7Jd per lb. White clover. 74d per lb. Potatoes, £3 10/- per ton (April prices). (b) Production. Records of average carrying capacity and production are collected in the annual statistical returns and could be used to determine the average returns that have been obtained from farm land. Statistical averages of production and yields per acre by counties even though available are of little use because of the various grades of land within one county. In some cases individual farm returns are available. For example the sheep returns allow of determination of average sheep carrying capacities for most properties. Further information as to average production could be obtained from the statistical records or from representative farm accounts, but abnormal results must be ignored. (c) Determination of Average Net Returns.

On the basis of experience and local knowledge normal farm expenditure for representative farms in that grade can be approximately determined. The net return, i.e, the difference between normal farm income and normal farm expenditure, is then obtainable. Actual results will be referred to later. These net returns allow of determination of net returns per acre or per sheep or per cow carried for each grade of land. On the basis of the standard returns so obtained, producing values for land of similar grade can be readily determined. The normal farm income can be checked as explained above by making use of statistical data already available and multi-

plying average production by average prices. The normal farm expenditure can be checked by setting out the individual items of cost for- all known expenditures such as shearing, dipping woolpacks, milking machine costs, rates, land tax, etc. Such estimates are already made by farmers when preparing the budget of the coming year’s expenditure. In Bulletin No. 21, March, 1931, the procedure and method of budgeting were outlined and a budget form included. Experience since then has demonstrated that not only is budgeting possible, but it is also advisable for every individual farmer. It not only assists him to adjust promptly his system of management, but also assists in the preparation of his farm accounts which provide the most definite check on both income and expenditure, and therefore on the production value of the land. , , It is hoped that with the co-opera-tion of farmers and public accountants throughout New Zealand it will be possible untimately to review each year such a number of balance-sheets that a large body of definite data with regard to farm costs, returns, and average producing values for the various grades of land will be built up. (d) Adjustments Required for Varying Condition. Producing values having once been determined for the representative farms, adjustments can be made for differences in various factors. These adjustments would be based on the estimated effect on net income of such factors as situation, climate, water supply, changes in prices for products sold, general improvements in methods of production, etc. The valuation of the representative farms is calculated on the basis of a farm fully equipped with necessary improvements at the time. Additions to or subtractions from the basic per acre earning value would require to be made to allow for the presence or absence of certain buildings and other improvements, for location or residential value where this factor has not been considered in the price, etc. Example of Method of Estimating Producing Value for Individual Farms (Season 1933-34). Income, expenditure, and producing value for the past season are set out below for the following Canterbury farms: 1. A good mixed dairy farm of 100 acres carrying 40 cows and 7 sows, and having 10 acres in barley, 10 acres in white and red clover, 18 acres for hay and 1J acres in mangolds. 2. A good mixed cropping farm of 400 acres carrying 400 ewes, 5 cows and 3 sows, and growing 100 acres wheat, 90 acres ryegrass and clover seed, 30 acres oats for horses, and 15 acres rape, 10 acres turnips and one acre mangolds and hay for sheep feed. 3. A good sheep farm of 700 acres carrying 1000 sheep, of which 750 are 2nd and 4th year breeding ewes, 250 dry sheep, comprising ewe hoggets, rams and killers. These are actual figures for farms whose records have been kept. They afford an interesting example of the methods that might be followed, adjustments being made for the average year’s returns under average conditions of prices, etc. Mixed Dairy Cropping Sheep Farm Farm Farm 100 ac. 400 ac. 700 ac. £ £ £

In the above table working expenditure includes such items as wages of working owner, wages and keep of employees, rates, land tax, repairs and general farm costs and depreciation. Interest on stock, plant and working capital is charged, but interest and rent on the land must be excluded since the object of the calculation is to discover the productive value of the property. The totals so obtained require modification to allow for location; use as a home, suitebility of buildings, variation in interest rates, trend of prices, etc. For example, for farm lands in close proximity to a town an addition would require to be made to the basic carrying value to allow for this factor. Conclusion. The Government capital valuation is a market valuation. Market prices of land tend to be above producing values. Government valuations made on the basis of sale prices of land,

therefore, tend to be above producing values. These valuations then tend to form a guide to other land purchases or sales and to farm advances or borrowings. Further, the valuation of all similar farm land tends to be based on the prices that have been paid for land. Farms that are conservatively capitalized and well managed tend to be penalised by these high Government valuations in so far as land tax and estate duties, etc., are concerned. Moreover, valuations as between districts which are based on recorded market values at varying times are not uniform and are often inequitable. By means outlined above a sounder method of valuation is obtained. Basic values could be fixed, constantly maintained up to date, and placed on a uniform basis throughout New Zealand with very little recurring cost. If this method were adopted as the basis on which valuations were made then landowners, investors, banks and stock and station agents would know' the true value of the land. Gambling in land would be less common, confidence would be restored, and farming would be more stable. 1934-35 WOOL SEASON . The following dates have been arranged for this season’s wool sales:— Auckland—January 22, March 29. Napier—December 3, January 12, February 18, March 25. Wellington—December 8, January 7, February 13, March 20, April 13. Christchurch—December 13, January 28, March 1, April 5. Timaru —December 17, March 13. Dunedin—December 21, February 6, March 9, April 8. Invercargill—February 1, March 4. Wanganui—January 17, February 22, April 1. JUDGING OF LIVESTOCK FLAWS IN SYSTEM. On the methods of judging livestock at the recent Royal Show, a Melbourne paper has the following comment to make:-*-Once again the show has emphasized certain flaws in the system of judging the livestock—flaws which seem to indicate that some of our breeders prefer to pursue a policy of conservatism rather than one of vigorous advancement in keeping with the economies of production. The one word which has been heard more frequently than any other has been “type.” That type is desirable in any animal is beyond question, but it can be assessed at too high a value, especially when other essential attributes are regarded as more or less insignificant. . , , , , . This applies particularly to dairy stock, which are maintained primarily for the purpose of producing milk and butterfat. A bull or a cow may, from the standpoint of type, approach, if not actually realize, perfection, and yet be of comparatively little worth as a factor in production. While it is true that many of the females which have gained leading awards at the Royal Show have combined type and utility qualities in a marked degree, and some of the foremost bulls in the ring have sired progeny which have been conspicuously successful at the bucket, the numbers of such animals have been relatively small compared with those which have been far more attractive than they have been useful. A few years ago the society introduced type and utility classes in the dairying breeds—a tacit admission of the need for the association of the two characteristics —but these never have been very popular, and, in some years, have been almost entirely neglected. The inference is obvious. In some of the most _ progressive dairying countries, including Denmark and Finland, no cow is permitted to compete at a show unless she has produced a prescribed quantity of milk or butterfat. The adoption of a similar system here would unquestionably be a step in the right direction, and tend materially to strengthen the economic side of the dairying industry. At the same time, it would be distinctly advantageous to give, special encouragement to bulls in which correct type was supported by the production records of ancestors above the average. The steadfast pursuance of that policy would inevitably result in the commerical value of both the stud stock and the ordinary herds of the State being enhanced, for. normally, it is from the former that the latter derive their imnrovement.

Income from: Sheep and Wool — 550 1075 Cash crops 135 825 —• Cattle and dairy 350 —— Pigs and sundry 170 20 25 - 1 ■ — ■ I, i——~ Total Income 655 1395 1100 Working Expenditure 510 920 675 — ■ ■ ■ 1 — * Balance 145 475 425 5% Interest on stock plant and working capital 25 75 75 > Balance £120 £400 £350 , - 1 II* ■ Maximum interest earning or producing value at 5% 2400 8000 7000 Value per acre 24 20 10 Value per sheep — —- 7 Value per cow 60 —