FARM MANAGEMENT

Waikato Independent, Volume XXIX, Issue 3102, 25 June 1929, Page 2

FARM MANAGEMENT

IN THE WAIKATO.

AN ECONOMTST'S INVESTIOATIONS. At the Winter Farm School recentlyheld in Cambridge, Mr. E. J. Fawcefct, farm economist, gave a most informative lecture on farm management in the Waikato, the features being embodied in the following:— At the outset Mr. Fawcctt referred the meeting to a series of tables hehad prepared to better illustrate his remarks. He gave the occupied area of Waipa County as 234,937 acres in 1927-28, an increase of 73,163 acres over the 1921-22 year. The cultivated area was 183,452 acres, an increase of 50,689 acres. The acreage of hay, etc., and roots was 19,766; increase, 3290 acres. There were 49,671 dairy cows in the County, representing an increase of 20,489, or over two-fifths. .There were 211.42 cows per 1000 acres, whereas in 1921-22 there were 180.33. The total sheep went up by 34,205 to 53,798, or 229 sheep per 1000 acres. Cattle other than dairy cows increased from 25,172 to 34,069. Of the total of 4,248,317 occupied acres in the Auckland land district, Waipa County had 234,937, or 5.530 per cent. The cultivated area was 183-,452 acres out of 2,380,249, or 7.702 per cent. Waipa County had 15.456 per cent, of the 127,883 acres in the land district. The percentage of dairy cows was 13.347 out of a total of 372,129, and of sheep 4.844 out of 1,110,431. Other cattle accounted for 9.520 per cent, out of a total of 357,839 head. Mr. Fawcctt showed that the increase over, the whole of Zealand, from 1901-2 to 1926-27, of lamb, mutton, wool, buttcrfat, beef and calves, was 136.7 per cent. On the per acre basis of all grass land the increase was 109.9 per cent. The total sheep increase (on the basis of 6 sheep toM cattle beast) was 69.7 per cent., and on the per acre basis it was 51.8 per cent. The total grass land—that was, the area of sown, ,native, and tussock grasses—had .increased by 11.7 per cent. Selecting a Dairy Farm.

The lecturer summarised the points to be considered in selecting a dairy-farm-as follow: —Amount of personal capital; amount and type of family labour; amount" of full-time male family labour; size and type of farm; amount of hired labour necessary, if any; class and type of stock to be purchased, implements,' tools, machinery, horses, etc., to be purchased; climate; outside influences; distances and class of roads to rail, factory, etc.; confirmation of land; soil typo; amount of productive area; scope for improvement of unproductive portion; type of feed; intensity of feed; prevalence and class of weeds, etc.; shelter and water on farm; subdivision of farm; position, condition, and type of sheds, yards, access, etc.; scope for efficient working of farm generally; and scope for improvement of farm generally. . He also quoted the following points to be considered in operating a dairy farm: —(1) Attention to stock, etc.: Time of year brought in and condition of animals; maintaing the lactation period; water and shelter; rugging;' avoidance of disease, sickness, accidents, etc.; and kindly treatment. (2) , Milking efficiency: Skilful, fast, and complete; regular; sufficient times daily; kindly treatment. (3) Cleanliness, sanitation, etc.; cleanliness of buckets, cans, strainers, coolers, milking shed, yards, milking machine, separator, etc.; water supply, drainage, etc.; keeping down dust, mud, smells, etc.; and avoidance of feed flavours, etc. (4) Herd-testing, keeping accounts, ■ and statistics. (5) Breeding stock, buying, selling, culling, etc. (6) By-products: Pigs, poultry, bee and fruit-farming, vegetables, etc. Improving a Farm.

Points to be« considered in improving a dairy farm were as follow:—(1) Topdressing; (2) cultivating, including ensilage and hay-making, as well as cultivation of root crops, oats, etc.; (3) Subdivision; (4) water and shelter; (5) rotational grazing, including harrowing, mowing, etc., necessary in the practice of rotational grazing (depending on points 1,2, 3 and 4); (6) breaking in unproductive area; (7) control and eradication of weeds, pests, etc. Judging from the upward trend of stock carried in county -rind land district, we would expect to find this movement a general one throughout New Zealand. Last year, especially from June onward, we were told on the one hand that primary production had increased and on the other that it had dropped. For a few minutes, therefore, the lecturer said he would consider the position. To obtain a correct impression of the rise or fall of production it was necessary to review a wide scope of years. It was possible to prove either argument by comparing two seasons happen to fit the point to be made. But anybody who employed that method was deliberately misleading the public. It was essential, also, that we should forget export prices and

market fluctuations if It was production we intended to discuss. To obtain a reliable analysis he had considered the years 1901-1902 to 1926-1927 inclusive, or 26 seasons. He had taken, as nearly as it could be ascertained, actual total production of the different livestock products for each year, and applied to each a standard value over the whole period. Having obtained standard values for each product, the total of all products for the year gave a measure of quantity also, which could then be compared with any other year en the same basis. For ease of handling, production was then reduced to units, each unit representing £IO,OOO at standard values. Having done this over the whole period, we could see at a glance whether production had increased or decreased. , Table 3 gave the position for each of the main livestock groups and showed conclusively that although there had been seasonal fluctuations in each group and in the total, the long period view showed a decidedly healthy trend.

Table 4 gave them a summary of increased production per cow, per acre occupied, per acre of grass, and per sheep wintered. In table 5 by-products had been deleted, as in most instances they did not represent a return direct to the farmer. In this table all cattle had been reduced to sheep equivalents on the basis of one cattle beast equalling six sheep. This enabled' farmers to study the stock-carrying capacity over a period of years. Figures 1 and 2 gave some idea of the increased production per cow and the total dairy cows carried respectively. The great factors in increasing Dominion production of primary products in the last 26 years had undoubtedly been the . increase in dairy cow numbers and in production per cow. In summarising the position the lecturer found that the total value of production derived mainly from the grass lands of New Zealand had indicated an appreciable increase over the period under review. It would be seen, he said, from table 5 that, when measured in standard .units, the rise had been steady (with minor fluctuations), rising from 1571 to 3832 units. The top line of figure 3 showed the trend of increase over the whole period, amounting to 136.7 per cent. This total increase had been contributed to by all branches of grassland products, but mainly by butterfat, lamb, wool, and beef. It would be seen that (1) the total grassland farmed has increased by 11.7 per cent.; (2) when all cattle were reduced to sheep equivalents the total number of sheep units carried had increased by 69.7 per cent., that it was shown that the stock carried per grass acre had increased- (3) this increased carrying capacity of stock units per acre of all grassland amounted to 51.8 per cent.; (4) the total production of lamb, mutton, wool, butterfat, beef, and calf products had increased by 136.7 per cent., showing that (5) the production per acre of grasslands had increased for these products by 109.9 per cent.; as total production had increased more rapidly than had the units of stock car-, ried on the area of grassland, we find that (6) production of lamb, mutton wool, butterfat, beef; and calf products had increased by 37.2 per cent, per sheep unit of the stock carried. It should also be noted, said the lecturer, that capital represented by the increase in stock of all classes was considerable. This had not been included as an item of production, although it might justly bo interpreted as such. Capital represented by increased area of improved land was in the same category. The data used represented the annual position from the farmer's viewpoint as nearly as it could be ascertained. Mr. Fawcett devoted the last few minutes of his address to an appeal for co-operation of farmers with his partment in the collection, of data, so that more accurate comparisons and results might be made public for the eduI cation of new farmers desirous of starting right. More production meant lessened taxation. So far no farmed had refused to co-operate, but it was desired that the scope of inquiry should be extended. The data would be h'elpful to every farmer, and would not in any way penalise the one who gave the assistance sought. ,