FARM COMPETITIONS

Taranaki Daily News, 25 August 1931, Page 15

FARM COMPETITIONS

GROWING OF HAY AND' ENSILAGE

' JUDGES’ COMMENT ON ENTRIES ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE AWARDS The judging of the hay and ensilage classes in the competition organised by a joint committee representing the Taranaki Agricultural Society and the Farmers’ Union, and acting in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture,„has now..,been completed, report the judges. ; Despite adverse conditions interest has been well maintained, and although entries show a slight decrease on those of last year, the entries were actually received over a larger range of country. In reality adverse conditions should stimulate such a movement, as the competitions are a real and practical method of determining how production can be increased and how production costs can be decreased. There is no doubt that where the competitions have been in vogue, for a number of years the “bovine bellies” of those districts are better filled with a better quality fodder than has been the. ease previously. Not that all of this can be directly credited to the competitions, but much of it can be credited in an indirect way through the information gained through the. competitions- being disseminated throughout the districtand through the discussions, between farmers and others which are really the outcome of some point or points which have been brought up through the'competitions.

A further, evidence of the valqe of this moveffieat and its appreciation, by farmers is the way in which farmers who have never previously been connected with the competitions turn out to sec “whatis doing.” Usually these farmers become the keenest competitors in following seasons. Another pleasing feature this season was the Way some competitors entered, stacks that they knew had no chance of being prize-winners. The reason in entering these stacks was to enable visiting farmers to get the benefit of some peculiar experience they may have, had and its consequent result and to warn others of some unsatisfactory procedure. To these farmers the thanks of the community is due, and- theirs is the spirit which will enable the competitions to be utilised to their fullest advantage for practical instruction. Acting on a suggestion made at the annual meeting, the ensilage stack class was divided this season, there being a -class for ensilage . from pasture and ensilage from crops other than pasture. This was done in'fairness to those competitors who made stack ensilage from oats, etc. The making of good fensilage from these crops is a more difficult undertaking than making it from grass, which crop is the one that can be saved with the least trouble. Then again it is obvious that ensilage made from a good mixed pasture is better in feeding quality than ensilage made from oats, etc. . ' Another slight'alteration was made this season in the way the points were allocated Last season a total'of 100 points was divided as follows for stack ensilage: Quality 60, cover 15, waste 25. There are two main governing factors in the quality of ensilage—the ,raw material and then the degree of curing that has been effected. Last season some competitors had a beautiful ensilage made from rubbish grasses while others had wonderful raw material but had made a very poor job of the making. These two instances may have been allocated the same number of points, although one may have been a good green ensilage while the other was distinctly brown; or .in other words the first may have been penalised for inferior grasses while the last was penalised for poor making, ibis season bv further dividing, the points competitors could immediately see where their weak ness lay, whether in the raw material or in the making. The points this seasonwere as follows: Raw material 20, -quality 50, cover 15, waste 15. In reality too few-points were, awarded, raw material because this- has a bigger bearing on t quality of the; ensilage than the comparative pointe would indicate, but we mus remember that this is an ensilage competition and consequently we must not unduly penalise the competitor who has not the-raw material to work on. in the. pasture competition this feature is catered for. A slight alteration was also made in the' points for pits. As most pits are fed down in one face the cover is all removed when judging takes place so points fbr cover were eliminated. The strong point about the pit should be the elimination of waste so that these pointe were increased, the points being as follows: Raw material 20, quality 50, waste 30. GRASS STACK ENSILAGE. The competition in this class was very keen, as is evidenced by the, small margin between the points of the first dozen stacks. The Fertiliser Company s Cup for the champion ensilage stack from pasture was wpn by G F. Mehrtens Lincoln Road Inglewood, which stack gained 93 points. This stack, which at tsi P® judging was 13 feet high, was a very fine one and contained a nice green sightly sour ensilage. The waste was very slight, and it being-a big stack the percentage of- waste to first-class material would be .very small. This stack was a S example of how the actual eason of the year of cutting does not matter as regards quality. In the past the term “early cutting” has been interpreted by many to mean early in the seaeon-October or November-but in reality early cutting means cuttin- at a comparatively early stage .of. the growth It is quite possible, as nt was in this case, to have early cutting in January or later. This stack was made from material cut.on January 15 from an extremely old pasture composed of a good mixture of high production grasses.. This was previously top-dressed wi T h e stack was 27 feet by 27 feet and was harvested with sweeps S ‘se'ven tt pS i» th. Srit .nd building «, then. o.nbnn.us and a good foot of soil was put on at once. . , T vr Three competitors tied for second place with s L ’ Paulger Tikorangi, D. M. Peak, Lepperton, and A. Turnbull, Lepperton. These were g all very fine stacks and scored the same points for quality as the winning

5U The following points, none of which ,io really new, Were'' brought out in connection wH ear]y stage pr( j ve( i the best without exception 2) Generally speaking the quality Of the raw material was none too brilliant. ■■ (3) With mixed pasture nothing is' to be gamed by wilting, whereas ‘ '■ ■■ ' ■' much may-'be- lost. b : ;:. (4) : Get the’material into-the stack with the least porerble delaj. (5) Earth up with at least a-foot of .soil as soon as possible. - (6) Have a P little’crown on the stack, but not too much, as too much will occasion difficulty in holding the soil on. _ (7) Except in exceptional circumstances keep the walls upngnt. (8) If the top of the stack has been. exceptionally tramped, heavy stones as a topping are practically as good as soil. , o (9) Netting provides one of the best methods of holding the sod out on to (10) is an advantage, but where pitching, is being, carried out the missing of a day lessens the labour. TPmnv «l (11) Open the stack so that at -least six inches of ensilage is being removed daily.. ENSILAGE OTHER THAN GRASS. This class was won by Mr. W. Bridgeman, Okato, with, a total of 93 points The material was oats and, as is the common practice in Okato, the oats were cut with the binder and the chcaves built into the stack without cutting , the. bands. By th J means a close, compact mass results which makes a nice green rut with the mower and swept in it is difficult to exclude air sufficiently with oats £ grt a good green ensilage. This crop -was cut on January 7 while he grain wi/in a soft milky stage. The stack, which was a round one, was btnlt .to a Sit of eiaht feet the first day and finished the following day and eighteen inches SUu away. Th. «>il was held «a by short lengths ol heavy '° S ’iw»X°e d tiiors pto withtotal of Ml points, these being II ?. r“l and F. A. Ashley! both of Okato, These etaote were .1.0 ol oats and cut in a similar manner to Mr. Bridgemans. HILLSIDE STACKS. . Competition was also very keen m this class and, the winner vas found in Mr. F. Bracegirdle, Kaimata, who wins the Blyde Brothers’ Cup for this class. The crop was grass from a young pasture which had been previously top-dressed with 4cwt. of basic slag. Cut on December 12, it was at a very good stage and turned out an exceptionally fine ensilage. Building was carried out continuously and the soil put on straight away. . Mr. J. N. Blyde, Lepperton, again filled second place, this stack also being, a very fine ensilage with very little waste. ’ ’ ' - • EARTH FITS. ' Some very fine earth pits were judged, as is evidenced by the figures. Severa. new competitors in ibis class acquitted themselves very well. The class was won by a consistently good performer, Mr. A. R. Bayly, Omata, who scored 93 points. This was from a crop of grass from a paddock 30 years old which was topdressed with 2Scwt. of elag in April and of super in September previous to the crop being harvested. It was cut in November at a young stage and a day was missed between buildings into the-pit. Building slowly into Jhe pit ip an advantage in that mere material can be got into the pit by slow building, and then again the material does not come out too sour. During the past seasonsour ensilage has been more or less under suspicion as a fainter, but with the slightly sour ensilage recommended any tul-sl is not the fault of the ensilage, but the fault of the farmer. _ . Judicious feeding will elimii*ie all chances of taint, and it is not so mueft the ensilage that is ox.aSal as it is the farmers’ feeding methods. During the past few weeks a trial was made with numerous- customers of a certain milkman, who feeds a nice sour ensilage to his milking herd, with a view to seeing if any taint had been noticed,•’ but no complaints were received. Of course, extremely -sour ensilage-may taint, although as yet this has not been proved, but /hair we consider ideal is the pleasantly sour type and not the rank, oojcctionaffic bottom L C,aSS ’Mr. A. E.ißojve,' Huir-angi, and Mr. .W. Bridgeman, Oka(o, tied for second place with 92J

CONCRETE FITS. The , entry ,in this class was small but the quality of the entries was good/ ilr. J. Cloke, Lepperton, wins the cup with a total of 91 pointe. It should perhapsi be pointed out that all of these classes are judged independently and standards' adopted for each class. It will be noticed that the winning stack gained 93 points,, while the winning concrete pit scored-only 91. This does not indicate that the' stack is better than the pit, but merely that in judging a pit a much higher standard is set. For instance, a waste of four inches on the pit is more serious than a foot on a stack, and would suffer accordingly. The rnateriral in Mr. Cloke’s pit was from 10-year-old pasture which was cut in December. The pit was filled in four consecutive days and the earth put on straight away. Mr, P. A. Openshaw and Mr. G. H. Bell tied for second place with 90J points. HAY COMPETITIONS. The quality of the hay'generally was not very high, but when, is the quality in Taranaki very good? Seasonable conditions prevent the making of good hay in this province. Mr. L. Marfell, Toko, wins the Daily News Cup for this' section. His was a bright hay of good grass and was entirely free from dust. Building was fairly good' and no water had entered the stack. The pasture was four years old and was top-dreesed last with slag. Harrowing was carried out with tripod harrows. The crop was cut on January 7 and it was out seven days. Four competitors, J. F. Phillips and Bone, Urenui, R. I. Claridge, Toko, Penwarden Bros., Omata, and I. Vickery, Tikorangi, tied for second place with 91 points, half a point behind the winner. Detailed points are as follow, only entries gaining over a certain number of points being mentioned:— STACK ENSILAGE—GRASS. .... .' . (89 .points and over.)

Raw maCompetitor. District. terial. Quality. Cover. Waste. Total. ■ G. F. Mehrteris (Inglewood) (20) (59) (15) (15) (100) •■■ ...... 18 48 13 ■ 14 93 1 D,. M. Peak (Lepperton) 18 48 13 13} 92} A. Turnbull (Lepperton) 16} 48 13} 14} 92J J. H. Paulger (Tikorhngi) 18 '48 12 14} 14 ’ 92} R. C; Watson (Inglewood) 171 48 13 92} Ft Bracegirdle (Kaimata) 17} 48 13} 13 92 W. D. Cartwright (Lepperton) 17 48 ' 13} 13} 92 L. A. Marsh (Hillsborough) . 161 48 13 14 91} A. Marfell (Toko) 18 464 13 13} 91 L. Marfell (Toko) 18 47 12 13} 901 F. H. Harford (Huirangi) ......... 174 47 13 13 ■ 90} N. Berridge (Omata) 17} 47 12} 13} 90} T. W. Telford (Oakura) ...... 18 46 ‘ 12} ' 13J ' 00 ' 17 47 13. 13 • : '90 T. A. Rowe (Toko) :■..... io 47 : 14 13 90 " Evan Jones’(Toko)’ .. • ■ '• 18} . 47 12 12 ■ 891 • R. Kingan (Toko) . • • .....'. 16 46 13} 13} 89 ■■ ■ J.’ Stachurski (Kaimata) • •• ....... 174 ■ 46} ' 12 14 ■• •89. A. Kain (Tarurutangi) • ....... : 16'. • 46}' 1?} ■ 13 ; 89 ■■ '' H. Foreman (Tikorangi) • • • • 18 47 11 13 89 P, Hohnor (Huirangi) .’ ...... 164 46} 13 13 89 ■ ' 0. Blackhall' (Lepperton) 16 46 ■ 13} 13} 89 • 46 13 12} ' ‘ 881 B. J. Fabish (Inglewood) 15 47 13 13} 88} D. Cameron (Huirangi) ■ ■ 164 46 13 13 88} A. E. Burwell (Kaimata) • • • 17 45 13 13} 88} W. J. Freeth (Urenui) 17 46} 12 13 88} J. F. Phillips (Urenui) 16 48 12 12 88 A. Dodunski • (Inglewood) • ...... 16} 45 13} 13 88 ■■ D. L. Tate (Urenui) • :..... 17} 45} 12 13 88 W. R. Bracegirddie (Kaimata) .. 16} 45} 14 12 88 E. Newman (Hurworth) 16 45 13} 13} 88 N. F. Skelton ' (Hillsborough) • • ...... 16} 46 12 13} 88 E. W. Sears (Okato) ............. 16 45} 13 13 87} E. J. Bishop (Hillsborough) .... ...... 16} 46 ■ 13 12 87} •W. Olson (Inglewood) 164 45 13 13 87} N. Berridge (Omata) ...... 16} 45 13 13 87} P; Gilbert (Hurworth) ...;.. 16 45} 13 13 87} H. C. 'Hills (Tikorangi) ...... 17 45 13} 12 87} T. W. Telford (Oakura) ...... 16 45 > 13} 13 87} H. Woisin (Lepperton) • • • 17 - ■44} 13 12} 87 H. E. Blyde (Lepperton) 16 45 ' 13 13 87 D. L. Tate (Urenui) ...... 17 45 12 13 87 G. W. Gee (Inglewood) • • ...... 16 45 13 13 87 A. J. Hale (Hillsborough) ...... 16} 45} 12} 12} 87 R. Street (Tarurutangi) 17 45 12} 12} 87 R. E. Gilbert (Hurworth) ...... 16 44 14 13 ’ 87H. E. ' Sampson (Hillsborough) ,.. ...... 16 44 13} 13 86} A. Cole (Urenui) • •• 16 45 12} 13 86} A. Kilpatrick (Lepperton) 16 ' 44 • 13} 13 86} J. Morrow (Lepperton) 16} 45 13 12 ' 8'6} Jans Bros. (Oakura) ' 15 45 13 13} 86} H. R. Marsh (Inglewood) 15} 44} • 13 13} 86} A. W. Yeates (Inglewood) 16 45 14 11 86 Pen warden Bros. (Omata) 17 43 12} 13} 86J. Poletti (Huirangi) 16 43} 14 12} 86 W. Hall (Huirangi) 16' 44 13 13 86 N. Berridge (Omata) • . . . . .... ...... 16 43 13 14 86 A. Alexander (Tikorangi) 18} 46 10 11 - 85} R. J. Luxtan ■ (Urenui) 16 45 12} 12 85} F. B. Matson (Lepperton) ... 15 45 13 12} • 85} R. Weeden (Urenui) 46 13 11 85} A. Roebuck (Okato) 15} 45 13 12 85} ' E. A. Grigg (Ratapiko) 15 45} 13 12 ’85} C. S. Carmichael (Tikorangi) ..... 17} 42 13 13 85} M. Kuklunski. (Ratakipo) 16 ’ ' 44} 13 12} 851 R. W. Giddy (Huirangi) 16 42 - 14 13 "’85W. Sutton (Huirangi) ...... 164 42} 13} 12} 85 16}' 44 13 11 84}- ■ R. B. Sutton (Inglewood) ... 16 • 42 13} 12} 8416 45 11 12 ■ 84 J. Mooney (Urenui) 16 45 • 11 11 83 I. Vickery (Tikorangi) 15 45 ■ 11 12 83 A. E. Baker (Urenui) 184 41 13 10 82} F. Adlam (Kaimata) 15} ■' ■JI42 •' 12 13 82} • J. . Morrow (Lepperton) .15 13 12 82 ' 12 '. 43 12 13 80 J. Putt (Okato)- ............... « 15 40} 12} 12 80 STACK ENSILAGE OTHER THAN GRASS. Raw maWaste. Competitor.' District. ■ ' ■ terial. Quality. Cover Total, (20) (50) (15) (15) ,(100) , W. -Bridgeman (Okato) ...... 174 47} 14 14'. 93 H. T. 'Paul (Okato) " .'. 17} 47 - 14 . 14 .. 92} ... F.' A. Ashley (Okato) . t. .r... 174 . . 47} .13} .14 • 9 ?} W.'Bridgeriihn 1 (Okato)' ..... 17 . 47.14} 43 . 91} . G.'A. Harris' (Toko) ,^..... i.. a 17} 46} 43. .90}. . H. T. Paul ' (Okato) j........ ..... 164 4.7 ■ 14 . .13. , 90}. C. Fotem an ' (Tikorangi) 16}-. 47 . 13 .13 ..89} . Smart and Son (Tikorangi)".'... ..... 16 46 13} 43 .88} R, C. Street (Tarurutangi) 16 45 12 _ 13 86 ENSILAGE—HILLSIDE STACKS. • 1 F. Bracegirdle (Kaimata) 18 47} 14 14 ■ 93} ' J. N. Blyde (Lepperton) ' 18 47 14 14 93 T. Sampson (Hillsborough) 18 48 12 14 ■ 92'' ’ H. D. .Farmer (Hurworth) 18 . 46 14 14 92- ' W. Bridgeman (Okato) • .....17 46} 14 13} '91 ' E. Dixon (Tarurutangi) ••••?. ..... 16 48 12 13}' "89} H. C. Sampson (Hillsborough) ... 164 47 12} 13} ' 89} T. Sampson (Hillsborough) 16 4712 14 89 ■ 16 46 13 14 89 17 47 12 12' 88-» P. Warren (Tarurutangi) ........... ..... 16 45 14 12} ■87} W. K. Morris (Oakura) 15} 46 13 13} 87 15 45 13 13} 86} 16 45 13} 12 86} 15 45 13} 13 .86} 15 46 13 12 86 15 45 12 13 85 A. Bracegirdle (Kaimata) ....... 15 42 13 13 83 ENSILAGE—PITS.. EARTH PITS. .. Raw Competitor. District. material. Quality. Waste., Total. , (20) (50) (30) (100) 18 ’ 48 27 93 17 48 27} 92} W. Bridgeman (Okato) ............ ...... 18 47} 27 27' 92} 18 47 92 18} . 47} 26 92 C. J. Oliver (Lepperton) 17} 47 27 91} Sorenson Bros.. (Hillsborough) 17 48 26 . 91 A. J. Hale (Hillsborough) 17 47} 26 90} 90 ...... 17 47 26 S. A. Ammon,.(Hurworth) ...... 16} 17} 47} 46} 26 26 90 90 17} 47 25 27 ■ 89 J 174 45 89} 89 17 47 2d 26} 261 26 25 27 27 24 25} 46 45 45} 44 44} 44 46 861 86} 86 86 86 86 85} 851 T. L. Walsh (Omata) 15 17 14} 15 16 44A 44 16 25 85' ' 83 80 P. A. Openshaw (Lepperton) • > • • ...... 15 16 44 24 W. H. Reader (Inglewood) CONCRETE PITS. ’ 18 17 . 14 .. 17 ....;. 10} 47 47 26 26} 27J , 26' 91 ' 90} P. A. Openshaw (Lepperton) . ■ 49 . 90} . . G. H. Bell (Oakura) •47 90 B. Budden (Huirangi) 47 26 " J. Klenner (Kaimata):.

HAY. Competitor. District. Quality. Condition. Building. Totgl. (55) (20) (25) (100) ,'L. Marfell (Toko) 51 17} 23 91} R. I. Claridge (Toko) ..."....... 50} 17 23} 91 ; J. F. Phillips and Sons (Urenui) 49} 17} , 24 91 Pea warden Bros. (Omata) 50 18 23 91 I. Vickery (Tikorangi) 49 18 24 91 S. Topless (Urenui) 50 ■7 23} 90} A. J. Luxton (Omata) J.} 22 90} F. T. Crowe (Lepperton) 50 18 22 90 A. MarfeR (Toko) 49 17} 23} 90 I. E. Jury (Urenui) • 51} 15 23} 90 J. F. Phillips and Sons (Urenui) .. 18 22 90 D. Mu Peak (Lepperton) 50 18} 21 ■ 89} H. Wallace (Lepperton) 16} 22 89} J. H. Paulger (Tikorangi) .... 50 19 20} 89} A. Alexander (Tikorangi) 50 19 20 89 H. C. Hills (Tikorangi) 51 19 19 89 F. T. Crowe (Lepperton) 48 17 . ; 22 87 J. Johnston (Urenui) 48 15 23 86 E. Maxted (Urenui) 48} 16 21 85} P. A. Openshaw (Lepperton) .. 48 16} 21 85} R. J. Luxton (Urenui) 48 17} 20 85} F. B. Matson (Lepperton) .... 49 16} 20 85} H. C. Sampson (Hillsborough) .. 48 16 21 85 A. R. Bayly (Omata) :......... 48 16 21 85 49 14 21} 84} : R. J. Luxton (Urenui) . 47 16 21 84 ‘ ! F. T. Crowe (Lepperton) .......... 45 16 23 84 H. E. Blyde (Lepperton) 4717 20 84 R. Andrews (Urenui) 40 16 21 83 P. Carey (Urenui) 48 16} 18 82} ‘ J. R. Woollaston (Toko) 48 14 20 82 W. Hall (Huirangi) 46 16 20 82 L. A. Jury (Huirangi) 45 15 21 •81 S. Purdie ’(Urenui) .. 40 15 20 81