VOICE OF THE PEOPLE

Taranaki Daily News, 12 September 1934, Page 9

VOICE OF THE PEOPLE

VIEWS ON CURRENT TOPICS VALUE OF ENSILAGE AS FODDER. MANAIA FARMER’S EXPERIENCE. (To the Editor.) Sir,—l noticed that at a meeting the other day a factory manager of one of the largest cheese companies remarked that he found that making cheese from milk from cows fed on ensilage caused a good deal of trouble. The manager at Kaponga, however, on being asked, seemed not to have had any trouble with it. Seeing that ensilage making in South Taranaki will soon be here, and seeing that the Dairy Division has apparently been in favour of it, it would be interesting to farmers to know what is right. Of course using the same waggon for carting ensilage as taking the milk to the factory may have something to do with it, as ensilage if sour and from the bottom of a cut does not have a very nice smell. But for. lucerne the first cut must be turned into ensilage, as it - is.) too . early, for hay. . I may not be right, but in past years I. have made many, hundreds of tons, and. I consider it one of our most valuable foods, at least for South Taranaki.

Of late years; anywhere near the ‘coast, swedes and turnips are. very uncertain, wliat. with club root :and; fly. pests. If ensilage is fed to cows in winter before calving there is very little risk of trouble, but after calving I do not like it without plenty of hay. The cows milk well on it, but give a rather low test. .They also lose condition, though they are quite healthy. My experience is that when we have a. dry autumn then there is nothing to touch it. It is a good plan if possible to hold ,a_ stack over as a reserve. Unlike hay, if the stack is not cut it will keep for years, and it is safe against fire.. It must not be forgotten that Taranaki in the past has had fairly sever droughts though not for the last few years, but history has a nasty habit of repeating itself. With a spare stack of ensilage to fall back on it is a good insurance. In. the old. days we. did not have the advantage of cheap super to force an extra growth, and it is cheaper to make 100 acres carry equal to 150 acres than buy the extra 50 acres, as you have npt the rates, interest and fences on the extra land. The longer I live the, more certain I am that it pdys to borrow to buy super. Of course, slag is 'good, but at present prices are too dear.—l am, etc., OLD FARMER. . Manaia, Sept. 11.

NEW ZEALAND AND QUOTAS.

(To the Editor.) Sir,—Speaking at a dinner at Hawera Mr. Dickie took the view that quotas should be resisted. When in New Zealand Mr. Baxter stated that New Zealand would not have the quota; the British Government was pledged to subsidise her farmers. Apparently the British. Government had offered at that time to put a two-ton quota on all foreign countries for every ton New Zealand would accept. The Farmers’ Union refused the quota. Now Mr. Dickie states that England should restrict foreign counttries. England is a great manufacturing country, selling her goods to these countries, otherwise she could not exist. A quota is the only hope of stopping ‘the Soviet Union of Russia. France, the Netherlands and other countries are dumping into England food which the people of those countries would consume if not prevented from doing so by their Governments.

Mr. T. Winks’ remarks regarding Eng* land not playing the game will doubtless be treated by farmers as they deserve. Mr. Muggeridge said that the fact that the idea of dairy quotas had not emanated from the British Government, had been announced by Mr. Dynes Fulton on his return from England, and added that Mr. Fulton’s statement had not been refuted by Mr. Coates. However, Mr. Coates has nothing to refute. If the British did not want a quota, why was Mr. Baxter sent to Neiy Zealand to make an effort to persuade farmers to accept one? Mr. Muggeridge asks where we stand on the quota question. It is interesting to find at least one member of the Farmers’ Union admitting he does not know where he is on the matter.

Mr. Baxter returned to England empty handed, and the British Government was forced to carry out its pledg and subsiaise its farmers. Now we require the tax of Id per lb. on foreign boneless beef and veal, and id on New Zealand boneless beef and- veal, which goes into a fund to pay the subsidy to the British farmers. The politicians in England will lose their sea 4 in the House of Commons if they cannot explain to the great mass rf the consumers that the subsidy is not coming out of the consumers’ pockets. However, New Zealand farmers can ask themselves is it better to have a quota, which will curtail foreign dumping, or. contribute by tax on their produce to assist subsidise the British and compete with the world’s dumpers.—l am, etc., ■ ;•' w. f. McCullough. Stratford, Sept. 10.