L—sc
1904. NEW ZEALAND.
LANDS COMMITTEE: (REPORT OF) ON THE PETITION OF G. G. DALGETY AND 22 OTHERS; TOGETHER WITH MINUTES OF EVIDENCE AND APPENDIX. (Mr. HOGG, Chairman.)
Report brought up on the 2nd November, 1904, and ordered to be printed.
ORDER OF REFERENCE. Extract from the Journals of the House of Representatives. Thursday, the 30th Day op June, 1904. Ordered, " That Standing Order No. 218 be suspended, and that a Committee, consisting of eighteen members, be appointed to consider all Bills and petitions that may be introduced into this House affecting the lands of the Crown, and to report generally upon the principles and provisions which they contain ; the Committee to have power to call for persons, papers, and records ; five to be a quorum : the Committee to consist of Mr. Bennet, Mr. Buchanan, Mr. Ell, Mr. Flatman, Mr. Graham, Mr. Hall, Mr. Harding, Mr. Hogg, Mr. Jennings, Mr. Lang, Mr. Laurenson, Mr. Lawry, Mr. R. McKenzie, Mr. J. W. Thomson, Mr. Vile, Mr. Witty, Mr. Wood, and the Mover."—(Hon. Mr. Duncan.)
i—l. 5.c
I.—sc
II
PETITION. To the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of Crown tenants of the Provincial Districts of Canterbury and Otago, holding Crown lands or runs under Part VI. of " The Land Act, 1893," showeth, — (1.) That an unprecedented fall of snow took place on the Bth July, 1903, on the various runs occupied by your petitioners, and in consequence thereof- your petitioners suffered heavy losses of sheep. (2.) That the losses sustained are enumerated below, showing that in some cases as much as 50 to 57 per cent, of the stock were lost. (3.) That your petitioners urgently request the Government and the House to pass, during the coming session of Parliament, a measure similar to " The Pastoral Tenants' Belief Act, 1895," and thus enable the Waste Lands Boards of Canterbury and Otago, after full inquiry into the merits of each case, to grant such relief as will secure to your petitioners time to enable them to make good the serious losses they have sustained. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray,— That your honourable House will be pleased to take the matter of this petition into your favourable consideration, and to pass, during the coming session of Parliament, a measure for dealing with the exceptional losses sustained by your petitioners similar to " The Pastoral Tenants' Eelief Act, 1895," or that your honourable House will take such other steps in the premises as to your honourable House may seem meet. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. C. G. Dalgety and 22 Others.
I.—sc
REPORT. No. 372. —Petition of C. G. Dalgety and Others, of Otago and Canterbury. Petitioners pray for the passing of a measure similar to " The Pastoral Tenants Relief Act, 1895," on account of losses of sheep from unprecedented falls of snow. 1 am directed to report that the Committee have inquired into statements contained in the petition, and have taken evidence thereon, which they now report to the House. They find that on the date mentioned there was a severe snowstorm, which resulted in a heavy loss of stock in certain parts of Otago and Canterbury. The evidence, however, shows that, apart from the storm in question, a number of causes have contributed to the serious reduction that of late years is said to have occurred in the stock-carrying capacity of certain pastoral runs; and that the managers of these properties believe an extension of existing leases, with better security for improvements, would encourage and facilitate the adoption of remedial measures. It is contended that the terms and conditions under which the land is held are of such a nature as to discourage, if not prevent steps being taken that would secure stock against exceptional stress of weather, and improve the value of the pastures. The conclusion seems, therefore, unavoidable, that, owing to the reluctance of these runholders to invest sufficient capital on improvements for which they might not be fully recouped when their leases terminate, the properties are not efficiently worked. The concession applied for does not appear to be so much a remission of rent as an extension of the term of the leases, and increased compensation for improvements at the end of the term. Opposed to such a concession is the policy of land settlement. Numerously signed memorials indicate that if the larger runs that are suitable for the purpose were subdivided into moderate-sized holdings, they would be eagerly taken up and made much more productive than at present. The question must, therefore, be determined whether in the interests of the State it is desirable that the sufferers by the snowstorm referred to in the petition should receive an extension of the term of their leases, or increased security of tenure, as compensation for their losses, or if their leases should be allowed to expire in due course, so that the State may be free to give effect where it is considered n-scessary to the demand for subdivision and closer settlement. Your Committee, after weighing carefully the evidence, and taking the circumstances surrounding the prayer of the petitioners into consideration, do not feel justified in recommending legislation that may have the effect of locking up land, that is being improved with public works, from an influx of settlers. While expressing sympathy with the petitioners on account of the losses they have sustained, they are unable to recommend any special form of relief beyond what may be allowed if the powers of the Land Boards are extended. They recommend that the Boards be asked to formulate a scheme that will have the effect of giving them more power to deal with the land upon such terms as they think advisable in the interests of the State and the occupiers, but that such provision should be subject to the approval of the Minister of Lands. 2nd November, 1904. A. W. Hogg, Chairman.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. Saturday, 3rd September, 1904. Hon. Sir W. J. Steward: I may say that the nature of the present proceedings is explained in this way: These gentlemen have come up from the South for the purpose of giving evidence before the Lands Committee as to losses sustained through snow in July of last year, their petition being before the House and having been referred to the Lands Committee for consideration. Owing to the want-of-confidence debate and the order of the House that Committees should not sit while it is taking place, these gentlemen have been several days in Wellington, and some of them must return south to-day. Therefore, as the Committee cannot formally meet this morning, by the courtesy of the Minister of Lands it has been arranged that those gentlemen who are leaving to-day shall make a statement, which the House will be asked to refer to the Committee for consideration The Committee will then, no doubt, arrange to hear the evidence of those witnesses who can remain. I think Mr. Tripp was mentioned as wishing to get away to-day. Will you please make such statement as you wish, Mr. Tripp, in support of the petition ?
J—l, sc,
[B. E. H. TRIPP.
I.—sc.
2
Mr. B. E. H. Tripp examined. (No. 1.) Mr. Tripp: I think that the pastoral tenants ought to be given a straight-out extension of fourteen years, to help them recover the loss sustained through the snow last winter. That would encourage the people to improve their country and to save hay. And the extension ought to be given to any one—not just according to the number of sheep lost. I mean that the man who has lost the greatest number of sheep should not have the greatest extension ; because I know of n number of men who went to a lot of expense before in saving hay and getting their sheep out, and who in consequence saved a lot of them. If relief were given just according to the number of sheep lost on each place the man who had gone to the expense of saving hay, and so on—well, it would be against him, as it were. 1. Hon. Sir W, J. Steward.] Would you be good enough to state the grounds of the application what has happened with regard to the loss of sheep, and so on ?—Of course, the loss has been very heavy on most of the hill country in Canterbury. I could not tell you the exact number of sheep lose in each case. 2. The snowstorm occurred last July twelvemonths? —Yes, in 1903. 3. 1 think the petition shows a loss of something like 217,000 sheep?— Yes, that is the number given in the petition. 4. Then, besides the number of sheep that were destroyed and the loss on them, there was the consequent loss of wool?— Yes. The loss in pounds sterling would be something like £217,000; the direct loss would be about £1 per sheep. r>. The petition gave the losses as affecting some twenty-three petitioners, I think. There are a great many other persons in the same position, are there not?- There are a great many people that the petition did not have time to go round to. I myself only got the petition a few weeks before it came up to Wellington. It was then being sent to the back country, and, as the mails would be going only, perhaps, once :i week, it would not have time to get round to half the number it people who had suffered losses. I should think the number of sheep lost would be probably something like 400,000, and they would be worth £400,000. 6. And then, of course, losses were sustained not only by the pastoral tenants —that is to say, the lessees of the large runs —but also by the holders of small grazing-runs and the holders of smaller properties? —Yes; there may have been some sheep lost in other places, but I think you will find most of the losses took place on the pastoral runs, because it is the highest country. On the freehold country and the small grazing-runs the people were better able to get to the sheep and save them. I think the bulk of the losses would be on the high country. 7. Then, there was the effect on the lambing —there were less lambs? —Yes. The number of sheep decreased very much, and you might say that half of those lost would be ewes. Probably there would be about a hundred and fifty thousand or two hundred thousand less lambs in that part of the country. 8. So that altogether the loss on account of the snow would not be very far short of half a million ? —I should think half a million would not be too large a sum to place it at at all. 9. Well, now, it is in consequence of this great loss that you ask for some remedy? —Yes. 10. And the remedy asked is as stated by you in your opening remarks? —Yes. An extension of lease would give people time to recover their losses. 11. Of course you are aware that there is a great demand for the cutting-up of land in the country, and also that it may be —though I do not know that such is the case —that some of the pastoral runs would be suitable for subdivision?— Yes. 12. That being so, would you suggest or ask that there should be a definite agreement to extend the leases of all, or simply to extend the leases of the holders of those runs which are not required for closer settlement? —I should think the fair thing would be to extend the leases of the whole lot, because it would not be fair to a man who had had a big loss to take away his run for cutting-up purposes in a year's time. 13. I mention that because there has been some correspondence in the newspapers about the matter? —Yes; I have seen something about it. It would be unfair to a man who had had a big loss to take his run from him straight away and give him no compensation. 14. That is not the point I want to get at. In the first instance you asked for a general agreement to extend to the leases. That would have to be done by legislation, I suppose, and it would be necessary to take these other matters into consideration ? —Yes, of course, it would be a point that would have to be considered. 15. Then, have you anything to say with regard to the conditions of the suggested new leases — as regards improvements or otherwise? —I think the holders ought to be encouraged to improve the country, and if they had fresh leases I fancy they would do it, because we have seen during this last winter that people who saved hay saved a tremendous number of sheep. I believe I saved five thousand sheep by saving hay. 16. I mean as to sowing down with grass, surface-sowing, and so on? —People ought to be encouraged to surface-sow grass-seed. 17. What do you mean by " ought to be encouraged " I— They ought to be given compensation. 18. That is to say, it should count as an improvement for which they would obtain valuation : is that what you mean ? —lt should count as an improvement. 19. It does not now?— The only improvements now are, I think, fencing and buildings, and the valuation is not to exceed three times the annual rent. There is no encouragement to do anything else. 20. Have you anything you wish to add to your statement ?—As I said before, I think an extension of lease ought to be given for fourteen years, and I gave my reason for the extension applying all round. One man that I know of went to big expense in saving his sheep last winter.
3
JB. E. H. TRIPP.]
L—sc.
He got them out with snow-ploughs, engaging men at a high rate of pay, and then got them away by train. This man saved seven thousand out of nine thousand. Well, that man deserves the extension just as much as a man who has lost a large number of sheep through practically doing nothing. 21. Do you mean that the present holders of leases should, from your point of view, have the term of their leases extended? —Yes; extended fourteen years. 22. Without the leases being put up to further application in any way? —Without being put up to auction —under Class 1., I think. 23. Are you content that at the expiration of that increased term the leases should be put up to auction in the usual way, or do you ask for any right of renewal? —We hope by that time there may be some improvement as to renewal and that kind of thing. 24. I mean renewal at valuation, of course? —Yes, at a revaluation. It is a difficult point just now when dealing with the losses occasioned by the snow. I think people ought to have it made up to them just for their losses by the snow. 25. You do not think they should get any more than that now? —No. 26. Mr. Bennet.] There is a matter in connection with this subject that we should not lose sight of altogether. Some of these leased areas are where the railway is to be made, and there is an agitation for land there. If the leases were extended I suppose the pastoral tenants would meet the demand for settlement in some way ? —Yes. In our part of the country the experience of cutting up is that the high country is being left on the Government's hands. There is a run there —the Blue Cliffs Hun —for which they cannot get a bid. It used to belong to Mr. Rhodes, and is near Timaru. 27. Mr. Lawry.] What is the currency of your present lease? —Mine has six years to run from next March. As things are now, I do not care to expend money in improving the land. The lease was originally for fourteen years. 28. Including the balance of your term, you want twenty years? —Yes; that would give encouragement to improve the land. 29. Can that be accepted-as the general wish of all who signed the petition? —I could not say it is the wish of all who signed the petition, but I know that the Canterbury men with whom I have talked about the matter, speaking broadly, would be satisfied with an extension. 30. Hon. Sir W. J. Steward.] Do you know anything about the pastoral leases in the neighbourhood of Burkes Pass? —In a general kind of way —I do not know them in detail at all. Patkick. Pattullo, Inspector of the New Zealand and Australian Land Company, examined. (No. 2.) 31. Hon. Sir W. J. Steward.] Will you make your statement now, please? You have heard what has been stated by Mr. Tripp. You might perhaps give some definite information as to the losses sustained on the runs that your clients are connected with? —I can give some information as to the losses on our own properties, which would more or less be similar in degree and comparison to the losses sustained by others. 32. I mean, could you give us some information as to what the total loss on a run with so-many thousand sheep proved to be, and therefore the percentage of sheep lost? — On the Hakataramea and Kawarau Runs, which are owned by my company, the total number of sheep lost was 32,692. After deducting the losses sustained on freehold lands and the ordinary deathrate, the losses on the Government runs were 15,600. 33. What percentage was that of the number of the flock? —The total number on the Government runs was 52,000. Out of 52,000, 15,600 were lost. I have not worked out the percentage. 34. It would be about 30 per cent., roughly? -Yes. I might give you an idea of the loss that that meant. I value these 15,600 sheep at 15s. each. I arrive at this value because I had to pay an average of 15s. for sheep of a worse character to replace those lost. 35. Yours is not the highest percentage of loss, I think, according to the petition ; it went up to 57 per cent, in some cases, I think? —My company had on two Government runs a loss of 50 per cent., and on another 17 per cent. The average comes to, as I have shown, about 30 per cent. Then, I estimate we lost wool at the rate of ss. a head. That is the average amount for the sheep on the properties for the last three years. From that, however, I deduct 2s. a head for what we recovered in dead wool, leaving a loss, at 3s. a head, of £2,340. I estimate the loss on the surviving sheep —36,400 —at Is. a head, for depreciation of wool-clip. That brings the total loss on the 15,600 sheep to £15,860. lam of opinion that my company would have been in a better position if they had lost this £15,860 otherwise than in the loss of sheep, for this reason: that we have had to buy fresh sheep, which will not do as well in the country for some time, and there will be a loss of revenue for the next two or three years from understocking and the fact of the sheep being strange to the country. That is how I arrive at the loss. 36. What relation does this loss bear to the rent you pay for the runs in question--how many years' rent would it represent? —The annual rent of the lands affected is £2,440. 37. It would therefore represent something like six years' rent? —Of the lands affected. We pay more rental than that to the Government; but that is the rental of the lands affected. That is all the statement of loss that I can give you. 38. Then, as to the remedy: do you concur with Mr. Tripp?—l generally concur with Mr. Tripp that an extension of lease would be the fairest and most equitable way in which to give compensation. It would have this advantage: that any runholder having security for a number of -years would naturally for his own sake endeavour to improve that country. " With fourteen years or more to run he would surface-sow land, and this would not only do himself good, but the ground would be left in a better state at the end of his lease. The Government runs in the country, broadly speaking, are losing in carrying-capacity. I think that the Hon. the Minister of Lands
L—sc.
[PATRIOK PATTULLO.
4
will bear me out in that. We know that there are exceptions, but, speaking generally, they are losing in carrying-capacity. 39. Would you be content, if the leases were renewed, that they should be renewed under exactly the same conditions, or do you ask that any alteration in the terms and conditions of the leases "should be made? —I recognise that there must be occasions where an absolute renewal of the lease on its present conditions could not be granted. There must be cases where such a thing could not be granted ; but, speaking broadly, it could be granted; and the request of the petitioners could be granted without any money compensation, and would improve the carryingcapacity of the Government leaseholds. 40. You do not quite apprehend what 1 mean. With regard to those runs which are not required for subdivision, if the leases were renewed would you be content that they should be renewed under the existing conditions of a pastoral lease, or would you want those conditions altered in any way?— l would be quite content that they should be renewed under the conditions of the present leases, because I recognise that this is hardly the time to bring up the question of a further fixity of tenure. 41. I meant as to improvements, really. You think the extension of the term would be sufficient encouragement to tenants to surface-sow, and so on, and* keep up the pasture, without there being any compensation for grass-sowing, and so on? —Yes, I think so. 42. Have you anything further to add to that J —l think not. 43. I want to ask you one or two questions arising out of certain correspondence. I suppose you know Canterbury generally pretty well: do you know Mr. Robert Guthrie? —No, I do not. 44. He is a small grazing runholder, I think, up in the Mackenzie country. I have here a letter that he has written to the newspaper on this subject. He states that " Land that, in 1890, Messrs. Baker, McMillan, and Foster (Commissioners) " —members of the Land Board —" would only give a fourteen-years lease of, knowing that at the expiry of that time it would be wanted for closer settlement, the Land Board of 1895 .... extended the leases for a further twenty-one years, on the grounds of compensation for loss by snow." He then goes on to saythat the lessees of the land referred to are again amongst the petitioners, and he protests against the renewal in all cases, inasmuch as some of this land may be required to be cut up for small grazing-runs, and so on, and suggests that the Government, before extending the leases of large areas of land, should appoint a Commission of thoroughly practically unbiassed men to go carefully into this matter, with a view to eliminating from the operation of a renewal or an extension any land that might be required for cutting up : do you think that is a reasonable suggestion ?— I recognise that there may be cases which could not be treated exactly the same. 45. Then, it would be necessary to make some, inquiry with regard to each particular run before it was brought under the operation of renewal: is that so? —That, of course, would be more a question for the Land Board than for us here to express an opinion upon. 46. Mr. Bennet.~[ Under what clause of the Land Act are the leases principally held? —The greater part of the runs referred to here are held under, I think, what is known as Class I. The greater part of them would be held without the right of renewal. Others would be held without the right of resumption ; but I should think a very large proportion would be held under Class I. 47. You recognise that there might be a number of these runs that would require to be let under Class 11. of the Act, in case they might be required to be cut up for settlement? -I think you would find there would be very few. 48. I dare say you are aware that there is an agitation at the present time for some of these runs, and on that account it would not do to put them under Class I. of the Act, but under Class 11., so that if they were required they could be taken? —It must be recognised that no holder of leaseholds under Class 11. could be expected to do anything in the wa}* of improvement of his holdings. 49. I understand that, but both cases have to be met to some extent-you recognise that? —Yes. William Grant examined. (No. 3.) 50. Hon. Sir W. J. Steward.] Will you please make your statement now, Mr. Grant? —My evidence, in the main, would be the same as Mr. Patullo's. On one run in the Mackenzie country I lost 12,574 sheep. 51. On what station? —The Wolds. The year before I had 414 bales of wool, and this last season, after the snow, I had only 210. 52. As regards the neighbouring runs —the other runs in the Mackenzie country —you are generally acquainted with them? —Yes. There were heavy losses on the Simon's Pass, Balmoral, and Lake Tekapo Runs. If I were granted an extension of lease I would fence in some valleysfertile land—and plough it, grow oats and hay on it, and stack them by until a snowstorm came. 53. And it would not pay you to do this unless you got the extension? —Just so. 54. Of course, these losses were common to all the stations round there? —Yes. 55. In fact, to the whole of the country ?—I am certain that if we got this extension and the Government made us keep a certain amount of feed by us—make us grow this feed we would save our sheep. 56. Then, you concur, do you, with Mr. Pattullo that if the extension of term were granted it would be a sufficient inducement for you to make these improvements without being granted any further concession ? —Yes. 57. Do you want to add anything to that?—No, that is all I want to say—that is, regarding the extension —and that the Minister of Lands could bind us down —me, at any rate —to expend somuch money within a twelvemonth in sowing feed. 58. What do you say ia regard to this contention of Mr. Guthrie's—and there are similar contentions in other letters reaching me from other people—that if a renewal were granted it should not be an indiscriminate renewal, but be made after inquiries—that is to say, that the
I.—sc.
WILLIAM GRANT.]
5
Department should ascertain, before it locked up the land for a further period, whether any of that land was suitable or would be required for cutting up into smaller areas?—l should say there would be a clause in our leases that if the land was suitable for cutting up it would not be let for fourteen years. 59. You think that would be a reasonable thing to do, before the lease was granted?—l should say so. 60. None of you gentlemen here, I understand, represent the small holders. You are simply representing the tenants of the pastoral runs, are you ?- -Yes. 61. I suppose it is a fact that a number of the smaller holders have also lost? —They have lost, but not to such an extent. They have got all the best of the country, you understand, and their losses would not be nearly so heavy as ours. 62. I might mention Mr. Julius Siegert. He sends me a letter stating that he lost something like five hundred sheep ? -He is a perpetual-lease man, down at Albury. 63. These smaller holders are also asking for consideration with regard to their losses through the snow. I suppose it is a fact that a number of them did lose very considerably? —In all that district there were losses, but the farther back the runs were the heavier the losses. Mr. A. It. Lyons: If we were in the same position us these men we should not be here to-day, because their tenure is secure. We should put up with the losses if our tenure were secure. We should have time to recoup ourselves, but now we have none. The leases of the four of us here expire in 1911. We lost our ewes very heavily indeed on the runs that lam connected with, and I had to buy sheep at from 15s. up to 16s. 6d. each to replace them. We cannot afford to buy as many as we lost; we have to wait until we can breed up. You see, the breeding country on all these runs in the back country is very limited, because in nearly all cases the best country has been taken away. 64. Eon. Sir II". J . Steward.] What you say is that there is a difference as between those whom you represent —the tenants of the pastoral runs —and the tenants of these smaller properties in that they have a security of tenure which you have not, and your reason for coming now for redress is that if you had a longer period you would be able to recover your losses, while they are not in the same position. That is your contention? —Yes. If we were in their position we would not be here to-day. We do not want to come and ask for compensation merely for the sake of asking it. We come as tenants to our landlords. We say, "We have been good tenants; we have held the country for a number of years, and put up with the vicissitudes of fortune, and now, nearly at the expiration of our lease, we have met with a smack in the face like this, which will take us years to recover from; and all we ask from you is to be granted a sufficient length of time in which to recover from it." 65. Is there anything else you wish to add on the present occasion? —No.
Thursday, Bth September, 1904. Duncan Sutherland, Manager of Omarama Station, Waitaki County, examined. (No. 4.) 1. The Chairman.] We shall be very pleased to hear your evidence, Mr. Sutherland? I have made some notes, Mr. Chairman, and in order to save time I will read from them. I am the manager of Omarama Station, Waitaki County. There are 180,000 acres in the run, and it is leased for twenty-one years from the Ist September, 1895, at a rental of £1,400, to Messrs. Young and Dalgety. The name of Dalgety will probably be mentioned here to-day —I mean Messrs. Dalgety and Co. (Limited), but they have nothing to do with this property. The Mr. Dalgety of Young and Dalgety is Captain Dalgety, of the Hussars. The number of sheep shorn in 1902 was 37,135, and the numbeT of lambs weaned was 6,000, totalling 43,135. The sheep shorn in 1903 numbered 28,441. The ordinary mortality would account for 1,500, leaving the decrease by extraordinary mortality 11,094. The value of the sheep lost, at 15s. per head, is set down at £8,320 10s.; the shortage of lambs, a 1 6s. each, at .£1,670; and the depreciation in the value of wool on the survivors, £1,000--making a total of £10,990 10s. During the last thirty-seven years the lambing ranged from five to twelve thousand. After the snow of 1895 we only marked 1,500 lambs, and after last winter only 2,100. Last winter, owing to the intensity of the cold —over forty degrees of frost -a large number of the surviving ewes slipped their lambs, and those that lambed properly were too weak to rear their lambs. The homestead is at an altitude of 1,450 ft. above sea-level, and the mountains go up to the height of 6,800 ft. Formerly the run carried 45,000 sheep better than it can carry 30,000 now, and the expense of rabbiting 6 acres for every sheep (merino) carried exceeds the rental. All the native grasses, &c, are dying out a fact well known to the Otago Land Board. The effect of only allowing three years' rent as the price of the improvements hinders a judicious expenditure of money, and is also the cause of a higher rent being given for a run than it is worth. The Committee may wonder how it is that sometimes people give a high rent —perhaps nearly a ruinous one. It is because they do not want to sacrifice their improvements, and they bid high in order to get a renewal An amount equal to three years' rent is the maximum allowed for improvements. On many runs the cost of rabbiting is now more than the rent. The fewer the rabbits the more money "has to be spent. I may say that I have to pay 3|d. per rabbit for killing now, whereas we used to get the work done for id. or Id. per rabbit. The rabbiting on the station last year came to a net loss of £530. I might point out that Longslip Run, consisting of some 60,000 acres, and adjoining Omarama and lying between Benmore and Morven Hills, was some ten years ago let at £400 a year. For some years it was unlet, and is now let for, I think, £25, and is practically unstocked and likely to be so. Omarama was nearly the centre of this snow blizzard, the area mostly affected by the snow being about sixty miles round it. If a circle were drawn round Omarama of sixty miles, the places that these other gentlemen represent would come within it.
L—sc.
6
[DUNCAN SUTHKKLAND.
2. Mr. Laurenson.] You said that the loss in an ordinary year would be fifteen hundred sheep ? —Yes. 3. What is your average loss —taking, say, one ordinarily bad year with a good year, would fifteen hundred be a fair average? —Yes, leaving out the two or three years in which there were heavy falls of snow, such as 1895. I have been there over thirty years, and the average would be about fifteen hundred, if you excejst, say, four years when we had a very heavy snowfall. We lost eighteen thousand on the same run in 1895. We got a .£3OO reduction in the rent, and the lease started anew for twenty-one years. 4. The rent is £1,400? —Yes/ It was £1,700 just before 1895, but the Lund Board reduced it to the original amount and renewed the lease. 5. In bidding for these runs did you not count on meeting with bad winters and heavy falls of snow? —It was only in two years that such extreme loss has occurred —in 1895 and 1903. 6. In how many years? —I have been there thirty-seven years. 7. And in thirty-seven years these have been the two worst years? —This was the coldest weather and the heaviest fall of snow that I saw there in thirty-seven years. We had 3 ft. of snow, and it did not break up for five weeks. 8. You say you would be in a better position if you had compensation provided for in your leases. The compensation for improvements is equal to three years' rental? —Yes. 9. If you had more compensation provided for would that be of help to you? —It would encourage us to subdivide more —to spend more money on fencing and the like of that. On a large property of 180,000 acres £3,000 or £4,000 would go nowhere in fencing. I put up thirty miles in one line. 10. Mr. J. W. Thomson.] You referred to the cost of keeping down the rabbits: are they as numerous as they used to be? —No, not nearly; but on account of the scarcity of the rabbits we have to give the men more money in order to enable them to make wages. We have to pay 3Jd. a head for the rabbits, instead of id. and Id., as used to be the case. 11. Mr. Buchanan.] If the rabbits have decreased so much, I presume the carrying-capacity of the country will have been increased proportionately ? —Yes; it will get better if we get the chance to stock up. The snowstorm of 1903 was a great calamity to us, because we were just getting; up to the number that we had before 1895. We cannot buy merino sheep; you cannot do it if you have the money. There is no such thing for sale as young merino sheep. I used to shear 45,01)0, and last year it was only 28,000. This year Ido not expect to shear 30,000. 12. Was 28,000 your minimum, or were you much below that number when the rabbits were very numerous? —We used to shear about 45,000 at first, before we had the rabbits, and for a number of years up to 1895 we used to shear from 36,000 to 42,000. 13. When the rabbits were most numerous to what number did your stock decrease- -what was your lowest number? —About 36,000. Our average was from 45,000 to 36,000. 14. That decrease was caused by the rabbits? —Yes. All the natural vegetation in central Otago is dying out. 15. Is the Committee to understand that the decrease from 36,000 —the point to which tne rabbits brought down the stock —to 28,000 has been caused by losses? —The number was reduced by snow last year to 28,000. Allowing for the ordinary mortality, there were 11,094 sheep lost through the snow. 16. Mr. Witty.] During the time you Lave been there, in how many years do you reckon you have lost above the average mortality of fifteen hundred —you say that during some years you have lost more? —There might have been six or seven in the thirty-seven. We had two or three bad winters, but they have been nothing like the winters of 1895 and last year. 17. Could you give us an idea of what the average loss would be over all the time, taking the bad years with the good ?- -I could not give you that from memory, bwt I know that wo lost eighteen thousand in 1895. The snow lay on the ground for three months, but it was not so heavy as that of last year. 18. Have you got as many ewes as you had when you were getting so many lambs? —Nc. We have to keep more dry sheep now. There are not so many ewes as there used to be. 19. Then, you naturally would not expect so many lambs? —No; we could not have the same number when we had not the same number of sheep. 20. When did you take up the last lease? —Ist September, 1896. 21. What was the number that you were keeping in 1896?— From 42,000 to 44,000. 22. Even before the snowstorm came the number had decreased to 36,000? —We ran from 36,000 to 40,000. 23. And the rabbits have also decreased ? -Yes ; they are virtually extinct on our side of the Waitaki River. 24. If you had more compensation you would put up better fences, I suppose? —We would subdivide the run more, where possible. Our country is very high. It runs up to 6,800 ft. above sea-level. 25. You would be able to keep your stock down on the warmer portion during winter?— The nature of the country necessitates that. The sheep have to come down to get out of the snow ; and then in the summer-time they go up to the tops. 26. Mr. Jennings.] What opportunities have you to get your stock out —is there &ny railway within reasonable distance?--The nearest is thirty-three miles away; but we never have stock to rail. ' 27. I think you misapprehend the drift of my question. I referred to a case where you wanted to save your stock —a case of necessity, such as has occurred? —We could not take a sheep out. We get a man there only once a week with the mail. Last year there was 3 ft. of snow all over the ground on the flat.
L—sc
DUNCAN SUTHERLAND.
7
28. Are your leases held from the Government or from the Otago Land Board? —From the Otago Land Board —that is, the Government. 29. Yes. What I wanted to get at was this: Have you applied to the Otago Land Board for consideration? —No. The presentation of this petition is the step we have taken. •'3O. Mr. Bennet.] What has been the cause of the decrease in rabbits? Has it been their natural enemies? —We see a few stoats and weasels; but I think it has been the continual poisoning of the ground and trapping. 31. Do you not think the natural enemies of the rabbits are playing a very prominent part in the decrease? —I have no doubt they are doing a good deal towards keeping the rabbits down. 32. Mr. Flatman.] I think I understood you to say that the native grasses in central Otago were dying out: can you give any reason for this, from your own personal experience? —No, unless it is the continual nibbling at the grass. We had a run of five very dry 3 r ears up to last year, and I think that had a great deal to do with it. Then, again, there is a kind of fungus growing, of which the Land Board are well aware. 33. Do you think the ground has been fired too often? —With me there is not grass enough to fire it. 34. Hon. Mr. Duncan.] Have you thought of any remedy to renew the grass on these runs? — -Yes. I think I myself wrote to you to inquire if some of your scientists would come down and see; and I applied to (he Land Board--to Mr. Maitland, when he was Commissioner of Crown Lands—that when the grass commenced to die away the attention of the Government should be called to it to see if there was any remedy. There is no soil or moisture there to make any grass grow. It is too dry. 35. What sort of grasses did you try? —Cocksfoot, arid all sorts of mixed grasses of that kind. 36. You are of opinion, then, that it is not to be expected that the runs can be brought up to the original carrying-capacity?-! do not think the run ever will. The spear-grass and the native grasses are dying out. If it were not for sorrel and thistles the station would have to be abandoned. The thistles sticking out of the snow were the salvation of the sheep that were saved. 37. Mr. Buchanan.] Are they dry Scotch thistles? —Yes; and little star-thistles. 38. /Inn. Mr. Duncan.] Do you think, if it were possible to divide the runs and keep at least one-third from September to February, that the natural grasses would grow up during that time, and that the stock would have that feed during the winter? Would not that have some effect? — The working of the place virtually does that now. I have two paddocks of about 15,000 acres each which are only used at shearing-time. About half of the ewes are mustered into another paddock, and when they are shorn they do not go back. In the summer they go to the hill-tops, and there is not a sheep to be seen lower down. In the winter the higher ground is under snow, and, of course, the sheep come down to the lower ground. 39. What month do you muster your sheep in ? —We start at the end of November for shearing, and we muster in February or March for stragglers. In April we muster to get the ewes for the rams. 40. In that case you are keeping the sheep on these places at the time the grass is in seed ? - It is only the ewes that occupy any of it, for five or six weeks, and we have islands that we put them on then, which the sheep do not get at at any other time of the year. 41. You know, I think, that that is the time when the grass would seed if it were allowed to - at just the time when you have the stock on it? —It would not be easy to do what you suggest on the high snowy country. 42. Ido not mean the high snowy country so much? —I am speaking from my own point of view. Mine is all steep country, coming down from 6,800 ft. In the winter there is not a sheep up on the high country, and in the summer there is not a sheep on the low part. 43. Did you try sowing grass on the flat? —Yes. It will not grow on the flats; they are only old river-bed. It gets dried up on the first two or three hot days. 44. Mr. Harding.] Do you do anything with turnips? —No; we cannot grow them on account of the altitude. 45. Mr. Flatman.] What rent per acre are you paying for your run now?—-We pay £1,400 for 180,000 acres. I have not figured it out. 46. The Chairman.] How long has the land been in occupation? —I should think, about fifty years. 47. You have been in charge, I think you said, for a long time? —For thirty-seven years. 48. How long is it since you noticed the grass deteriorating in the way you mention? —I should say, from fifteen to twenty years ago. 49. Has it been getting worse from year to year? —Yes, always getting worse. This sort of yellow-coloured mossy fungus grows on the surface. 50. About what time was it, can you tell us, when the run was carrying its largest number of sheep ? —About twenty years ago. 51. It then carried about 45,000 sheep? -Yes. 52. Its carrying-capacity has been gradually on the decline, I suppose?— Not very gradually. When it came down to 36,000 or 38,000 we tried to carry it on at that—3B,ooo. It has just remained at that figure. 53. During the last twenty years has the value of sheep been going up or down? —Up to three or four years ago we used to sell all our surplus sheep, to be boiled down, at Is. a head. I have sold them at 9d. -. 54. On the whole, do you think the run is more profitable or less profitable than it was twenty years ago ? —Less, by a long way. 55. It produces less money?— Yes. I know that for a long time the owners never received a farthing from it—that was when wool was so low. It was at sd, per pound, and sheep were at Is.
I.— 5c
8
[DUNCAN SUTHERLAND.
For five or ten years the owners never got a farthing. In fact, of my own free-will, I went without £100 of my salary. 56. How have you dealt with the rabbit nuisance? —By poisoning and trapping. 57. Did you allow the men themselves to dispose of the rabbits? —No; T always got the skins. t paid them so-much a skin, and found them in poison, and sometimes found them their tucker. 58. Do you think the nuisance is kept well under now? —Yes; exceedingly so with us, and all the way up the Waitaki. 59. It is no longer formidable--you can deal with it? —Yes. f>o. Which was the severest storm, that of 1895 or last year's? The last one was by far the colder, and the fall of snow was the heavier. We had 3 ft. of snow, and over forty degrees of frost. The snow lay for a longer time in 1895, and we lost far more sheep, but they were of much less value then than they are now. 61. You have been disposing of the rabbit-skins, I suppose?- Yes. 62. Can you say how much they netted last year? —About £800 or £900, and the) , cost either £1,520 or £1,530. That was the total amount paid to rabbiters; and we often have to give then: their tucker in if they do not make anything like fair wages at 3jd. a skin. 63. The expenditure was considerably more than the receipts? —Yes. In the early days, when we were getting the rabbits killed at |d. and Id. each, the account nearly balanced. 64. But now, when you are paying a higher price, there is a big loss? —Yes, there is a greater loss, because we have to keep on the men just the same. 65. Were those two storms of 1895 and 1903 decidedly exceptional in character? —Yes, quite. 66. Over the period of thirty years previously, when you were in charge of the run, you had nothing to approach them, had you?— No, nothing like them, 67. Mr. Witty.] You stated that you made more years ago, when sheep were at Is. a head, than you are making now. Wool was also low at that time. You put the price down now at 15s. per sheep, and, of course, wool is at a much better price now? —I think I said that from five years back to fifteen year?—for ten years- -we made nothing at all. 68. I understood you to say that you were making more out of the run years ago than you are making now ? —I beg your pardon : I said from a period of from five to fifteen years back the owners made nothing out of the place, and I myself, of my own free-will, went without £100 of my salary. Ido not know how you could have misapprehended me. 69. I understood you to say, in answer to a question, that you were making more out of the run years ago than you are now. You were then selling sheep, you said, at Is. and 9d., and wool was low. Wool is at a beiter price now, and the value you put down for your sheep is 155., and you have only about 12,000 less than you had then; so that I cannot see that you are making less now than you were then? —I do not think I could possibly have said that we made more out of the run from five to fifteen years ago. Up to fifteen years ago, when the prices were better, we made more, but the sheep are quite different now from what they were ten or fifteen years ago. 70. Mr. Harding.] Have you taken any steps to import any Canadian grasses suitable for snowy country? —No. 71. What do you consider is your net revenue, taking the carrying-capacity of the run at 38,000? —I cannot tell you that. I just ship the wool Home. The owners live at Home. I draw the cheques, and the bank supplies the money. I have nothing to do with the financial aspect of the matter at all. 72. Mr. Flatman.] How do you arrive at the profits of the station if you do not know the value of the wool that goes away? -I know by the owners' letters to me, and I have a very good idea how matters stand when the account sales come out in the papers and catalogues. But I know that for from five to fifteen years ago the owners got very little, sometimes nothing at all —the rabbits were so bad and wool was so low. 73. The owners would keep the books at Home? —They never told me anything about the profits. That was not my business. I did the practical work of the station, and they never interfered with me nor I with them. 74. The Chairman.] That is all, thank you, Mr. Sutherland. —I would like to add, Mr. Chairman, that I have to speak for a neighbour of mine, Mr. F. A. Sutton, of Waitangi. He wrote me this letter: " I will be glad if you will represent and act for me in Wellington before the Commission to consider relief for Joss of sheep through 1903 snow —my loss was over 5,000 out of 16,000 —and draw attention to the extreme rent, £950." I made this memorandum on the letter in Mr. Sutton's presence: "In connection with Mr. Sutton's loss, I may state that I consider his case the hardest. His rent is the highest in proportion to stock carried, and, unfortunately, his loss of sheep has been extraordinary. As he has quite recently taken up a new lease, an extension to him would be of no relief. The Hon. Mr. Duncan knows his case." His case is about the hardest I know. Then, I have here a letter from Mr. Rose, manager of the National Mortgage and Agency Company (Limited) at Oamarn, in which he says, " The Te Akatarawa country " —lt is the station next to Mr. Sutton's—" suffered very severely indeed, the shortage after careful musters proving to be no less than 5,782 sheep out of 16,592 turned out to winter. The severity of this loss is accentuated by the fact that it was the heaviest amongst the young sheep by about 8 per cent." Then, I have a telegram or two here in connection with that. William Laidlaw, of Matakanui, examined. (No. 5.) 75. The Chairman.] Will you proceed, please, Mr. Laidlaw?—l have a statement here, Mr. Chairman, showing how the numbers and also the values of the sheep lost on the Matakanui Station through the snowstorm are arrived at. In 1903, after deducting the sheep wanted for food and those sold, there were 17,679 on the place. In the following year—at the shearing just passed— 1 shore 10,391, which meant a loss of 7,288 head. For, I think, eight years my average death-rate
L—sc
WILLIAM LAIDLAW. |
9
lias been 6| per cent. ; and, of course, it is only fair that I should allow for an average death-rate on that 17,679. That comes to 1,183 head, leaving a loss attributable to the snowstorm of G,105 head. In 1903 there were 5,413 ewes put to the ram. On that number I have allowed an average death-rate of 6f per cent. —365 —leaving 5,048. The average lambing for seven or eight years has been 64J- per cent., so that from the 5,048 ewes I ought to have had 3,255 lambs. From this number 1 have deducted the number of lambs marked —namely, 1,415 —leaving the loss attributable to the snowstorm at 1,840 lambs. Then, with regard to the values, I have put down the 6,105 sheep at 13s. each, the fleeces (6,105) at 4s. each, and the 1,840 lambs at 7s. 3d. Those items come to £5,856, and from that I deduct the value of 4,300 skins picked up, at Is. 9d. each, £376, leaving a loss of £5,480. In connection with those values I would like to say that the 13s. per sheep for the shorn sheep is arrived at on the basis of sales which have taken place in my own neighbourhood. I have submitted them to the agents, who say they think those prices are fair and reasonable. The price of 7s. 3d. per head for lambs was realised at a neighbouring station when the lambs were sold —I refer to the Patearoa Run. Of course, the process of stocking up is necessarily a very slow one. Of late years we have been losing a lot of lambing country, and the average is not a high one; and by the time the very old culls, which must be sold, and the sheep required for food are deducted, the increase, as you will see at once, must naturally be a very slow one; and so it takes a number of years to bring the number of sheep up to the former carryingcapacity again. The 17,600 sheep referred to was a little below my usual.number, but after we got an extension of lease in 1895 under the Pastoral Tenants' Relief Act I reduced the stocking of the run by about four thousand. I saw the necessity of giving the grass an opportunity of recovering, and I reduced the stock accordingly. 76. Mr. Wood.~\ What is the greatest number of sheep you have carried on the run I— A little over 36,000. 77. What number do you carry now?—l will carry from 18,000 to 20,000 after this. 78. What number do you carry now? —A little over 11,000 at present. I gave j'ou the figures which account for that reduction. When we first took up the run there was a commonage which we had the use of for about eighteen months or two years, and we lost a 7,000-acre block on the flat by the expiry of the lease. Then, some years ago the Government gave notice of resumption and took another 7,000-acre block. So all the low country has been docked off us. 79. How many sheep did you shear last year? —10,391. 80. The value you set down at 13s. : was that without wool? —Yes. 81. Four shillings, you say, for the wool? —Yes. 82. That makes 17s. a head? —I may say that a number of ewes have been sold in the district at the following prices: At Puketoi, practically a neighbouring run, 155.; at Linnburn, 145.; and at Ida Valley, 14s. 10d. So I think ray figures are not too high. 83. Do you think that is a fair average price, taking culls in? —I think it is a very fair average price. I could not possibly have replaced them at that price. Those were the prices that were given for old culls —cull ewes. My losses were pretty even right through. The loss was pretty heavy amongst the younger sheep, but was fairly even right throughout. 84. Mr. Harding.] Have you experienced the same difficulty as Mr. Sutherland with regard to the diminution of the natural grasses? —Yes. No doubt central Otago is going back. 85. Have none of you taken any steps to try to acclimatise suitable grasses?— Until we got extensions of lease in 1895 we did not know who was to own the runs. About every two years we were brought into the market and had to fight for our very existence for subdivisions of the run, and these subdivisions were only put up for two, three, four, and five years So I have done nothing in the way of sowing grasses on the run. 86. Mr. Jennings.] With regard to these recurring leases, yours is the second, is it not? — Yes; we bought in 1883. 87. You said that the country is becoming of less value owing to the grasses going back, and so forth. I see that the petition merely asks that a similar Bill to that of 1895 be passed, giving relief. If the country is going back, as you and Mr. Sutherland say, is there any other remedy that you can suggest besides passing a Relief Bill? —Nature might come to our assistance. The last five seasons have been very dry in central Otago. I may say that I have repeatedly mentioned to the former Commissioner of Crown Lands, Mr. Maitland, and other members of the Land Board, that I thought they ought to grant a rebate of rent and satisfy themselves that the money was spent in sowing suitable grasses throughout the country. 88. Have any experiments been made in regard to what may be termed "suitable" grasses? —I have never done so; but within some miles of me —at Earnscleugh—the Government took over a run, and I suppose the Hon. Mr. Duncan could tell you what the experience was there. They were sowing grasses for weeks and months, but what the result was I cannot say. 89. Mr. Harding.] It was not very striking, anyhow? —I did not see it myself. 90. Mr. Ell.] What is it that you want the Committee to do in the way of recommendation 1I suggest an extension of lease, to give us time to recoup our losses, as I am given to understand that financial assistance would not be entertained. 91. What is the term of your lease now? —It expires in 1910. 92. And then the lease will be placed on the open market, and you will run the risk of losing it I— Yes. 6 93. Is it on account of uncertainty that you do not feel inclined to do much in the way of grassing? —By the time the grasses began to establish themselves you would run the risk of being outbid; and the runholder is the shy-cock of any man who wants to go for him. He knows that the runholder must have a certain subdivision. Such a case happened with us. One of our subdivisions was put up, and a man with whom I had had a little difference ran it up to an exorbitant figure and bought the lease, and we had to buy it off him again. But Sir John McKenzie accepted
2—l. sc,
[WILLIAM LAIDLAW
I.—sc
10
the surrender, and put the lease up again at a figure one could make a living at. If an extension of lease was given us there would be every inducement to us to improve our country. At present by the time you would derive some benefit from improving it you may lose the lease. 94. If you had the right of renewal at a reassessed value would that be satisfactory —that is, if you had occupation with right of renewal I— Yes; I should certainly grow grasses then. I should be inclined to subdivide even some of the present subdivisions and sow grasses in the gullies. 95. You would be prepared to do that if you had a guarantee of renewal at the expiration of your term? —Yes, I would, undoubtedly. 96. Do you think that would be satisfactory to the holders of leases? —I think it would be most satisfactory. 97. What term do you think would be satisfactory? If you had a lease of the run for fourteen years without revaluation, and could then take it for another fourteen years at a rent to be fixed, would that be satisfactory? —I am sure the country would be handed back to the Government as a valuable asset. 98. If you had a lease for fourteen years, with the right of renewal, would that be satisfac tory? —Yes. 99. At a valuation to be fixed? -Yes; a valuation to be arrived at between the tenant and the Board. 100. My idea is that in fixing the value the Government should appoint one valuer and the owner another, and that an umpire should be called in? —Yes. Do you mean with compensation for improvements? 101. Yes?— Yes. 102. You will understand that there should be a reasonable limitation? —Yes. I think every one must admit that the present limitation is too low —three times the rental. It does not affect me so very materially at present, because in 1895 all the leases were grouped into one, and we hold them under one license. Three times my rental would come to about £1,700. So lam very much better off than a number of my neighbours, who might feel inclined to put improvements on a subdivision, but the improvements would very much exceed the rental. 103. With regard to the amount of rent that you are asked at present, do you consider it fair under ordinary conditions in an ordinary season? —-Yes, I think the rental of £586 that we are paying at the present time is reasonable. When we had 36,000 sheep we were paying £3,040; but that rental never came out of the place. 104. How long have you been in occupation of the present run ? —Since 1883 —for twenty-one years. 105. Has the run gone back? —Very materially. There is no doubt that all central Otago is going back. 106. What do you ascribe it to? —The droughts, and possibly the feed being eaten down, and possibly overstocking. We have been trying to get the last penny out of the places. We have had very hard times. 107. You say you have attempted to make as much as possible out of the run, because at the end of your lease you do not know whether you will get possession again? —We cannot tell whether we shall get it back or not. 108. If you had the right of renewal you would feel disposed to nurse the run so as to keep its strength up? —Certainly. As an instance, I mentioned that I reduced the carrying-capacity by some four thousand when I got relief under the Act of 1895. Of my own volition I reduced it by four thousand sheep. 109. Assuming that you were a freeholder of this run, that you leased it to a tenant, and that he worked it at a loss, would you consider under ordinary conditions that he would be justified in coining to you and claiming the large sum that you are asking the State to pay you for the loss of sheep ? —I do not ask for monetary consideration ; I ask that the compensation be made in the shape of extended leases. 110. You would be satisfied with that? —Yes, and secured tenure. 111. Hon. Mr. Duncan.~] AVhat was your loss in 1895? —4,987 sheep. 112. Did you reduce the station by an additional four thousand after the Land Board had granted that extension of lease? —Shortly after that I reduced it. I have not got the numbers here. 113. What I want to get at is this: You surely must have been very much overstocked if you required to reduce the number by eight thousand ?—I admit that the run was overstocked. Of course, that 4,987 includes the ordinary death-rate. 114. Mr. Bennet.~] Would the rabbits have been at their worst at that time?—l have been keeping at the rabbits. They have not given me any trouble. I have always been able to keep them well in hand. They were certainly more numerous at that time than they have been lately ; but it is a case of keeping at them all the time. 115. Did you try sowing Yorkshire fog in the gullies?—No; I have never sown any grassseed on the run. 116. The Chairman.] I think you said there has been a falling-off in the grass and the carry-ing-capacity of jour land? —That is so. 117. Can you give the Committee any idea as to how this could best be remedied?—l think, by light stocking and by sowing grasses on the country. Of course, nature must assist us to a certain extent with rain. Central Otago is a very dry part of New Zealand, possibly as dry a part as there is in New Zealand. 118. Is any allowance made, when the improvements are computed, for surface-sowing and the other steps that you referred to? Are they counted in the value of the improvements ?-No; only fencing and buildings. 119. Do you think that surface-sowing and other methods of improving the run should be included?— That is what I suggested many times to the members of the Land Board down there.
11
I.—sc.
WILLIAM LAIDLAW.]
120. In your opinion, would that lead to very desirable improvements being carried out?— Yes, without doubt it would. 121. Especially towards the termination of the leases? —I think it would be better if you could make a start at the beginning and have the benefit of the improvements right through. I think that the sooner the grassing could be proceeded with the better. 122. What you say is that owing to the limitation of the amount allowed for improvements at the termination of the lease the land is not being applied to the use to which it might be put? — Owing to the limitation and the fact that one has to fight for subdivisions of his run continuously at present. That is one of our great grievances. The authorities have no right to ask a man to go and fight for his homestead every few years, and that is practically what we have to do down there. 123. What has been your experience of the rabbit nuisance? Has that been well got under? — Yes; it has given me no trouble until this last spring. The rabbits would not touch the pollard, and I had to have recourse to trapping again. This spring they may take the pollard quite as readily as ever. Last spring and autumn was the only failure I have had with the pollard. 124. Then, you have nothing to apprehend with regard to the rabbit nuisance? —No, I am not afraid of the rabbit pest. I may say that I ran out the average for the last twelve years, and it comes to £424 —practically another rent in rabbiting. 125. Mr. Harding.] That is net?— Yes. 126. Mr. Witty.] What is the length of your lease? —It expires in 1910. 127. What is the length —twenty-one years?-—No. Under the Pastoral Tenants' Relief Act of 1895 we got fourteen years' lease from that time for the bulk of the run, and the lease of one low subdivision for seven years with the right of resumption. It was resumed, but we arranged with the Board to get it back, and we got it. The high country was no good without that block. 128. You say that the Department should allow compensation for any grassing-down, but at the same time you say you have never tried it at all? —I suggest that the Government ought to grant us a rebate of a certain portion of the rent, to sow grass. That would be very much enhancing the public estate. 129. It seems a pity that grass-sowing has not been tried? —There was no use in trying it. A person doing it may not derive the benefit. 130. With a fourteen-years lease it would surely pay to try it, even if the trial was only on a small scale?--I applied for permission to plough up some ground to sow down, but it was refused. I wanted to turn up the ground, and, of course, I would have sown down grass, but they would not allow me to break the surface 131. Mr. Jennings.] You said that if you had a longer term of lease you would nurse the land more —that is, you would not take so much out of it ? —I would see that it was not taxed to its utmost capacity. 132. If the land were freehold you would still further nurse it? —Not with a secured tenure. With the secured tenure it would be as good as freehold. 133. Then, it is simply a question with you of the term of the lease? —Of the term of the lease. The Government is to blame, on account of treating us in the manner they have with the short lease, for some of the country being in its present state. 134. Hon. Mr. Duncan.] Would the improvement of the grasses be any protection against a snowstorm when it came ? —I do not know whether it would be a very material protection against a snowstorm. There would be this protection: that the sheep would be in better order, and would stand the pinch better. 135. They might not if you increased the number? —I never said I would increase the number. James Sutherland, Manager of Benmore Station for Messrs. Robert Campbell and Sons, examined. (No. 6.) 136. The Chairman.] Will you make your statement now, Mr. Sutherland? —I have not much of a statement to make, Mr. Chairman. Our losses are shown in the petition, and of the number twenty-five thousand were lost on Benmore Station, which I manage, and of which I can speak with knowledge. Tin total loss of sheep on Benmore was thirty-four thousand, but I deduct the average death-rate of nine thousand. The average death-rate on the station over a number of years has been 10 per cent. —that is, with the exception of the two bad years. In ordinary winters the deathrate averages 10 per cent., and deducting the ordinary death-rate we get a total loss through the snowstorm of twenty-five thousand in round numbers. The lambing average is about 65 per cent. In 1903 the lambing was 30 per cent., showing a shrinkage of about 35 per cent., which I attribute to the snow. Then, the wool-clip was much lighter in consequence, and the quality of the wool was inferior. With regard to the rabbits, 1 can only say that the remarks made by Mr. D. Sutherland as to the expense of keeping down the rabbits I agree with. I might mention that in 1894— previous to the winter of 1895 —the station was at its full carrying-capacity, there being, in round numbers, 90,000 sheep on the place. During the ten years since then there have been 160,000 lambs bred, in round numbers; we have bought about 25,000 sheep for stocking-up purposes; we have sold sheep which it was absolutely necessary to sell to the number of some 50,000; and there are at present on the station 54,000 head. The total deaths —including the sheep killed for station use —during the ten years are thus shown to be 171,000 sheep. 137. Mr. Harding.] Are your principals or employers resident in New Zealand? —No; at Home. .138. Could you give us any idea as to your net returns over a period of, say, five years? —No, I could not. 139. Does the country suffer much from high winds?— Yes, considerably sometimes. 140. What I want to get at is as to whether there is any country suitable for breaking up?—
L—sc.
12
[JAMES SUTHERLAND.
No; only very small patches. It takes us all our time to grow enough feed for the few horses we keep. 141. Mr. Witty. .] Benmore is rough, rugged country, is it not? —Yes. There is an extensive area of the country which is absolutely useless in the winter-time. The snow lies on it, and the liner grasses are covered up. The country rises to a height of 7,000 ft. or 8,000 ft. 142. You keep merinos, I presume? —Yes, all merinos. 143. Your lambing average is 65 per cent.? —Yes. 144. Is not that a very big average for rough, hilly country?—l do not know. Fortunately the ewe country is fairly warm, and lies well to the sun. 145. What would be the general average for merinos down on the flat and in good paddocks — not on Benmore, but on good grassy plains? —I am not sufficiently aware of what it is in good country to answer. I was all my life on rough country. 146. Would it be more than 90 per cent. ?--No; I think not. 147. Perhaps it would surprise you to be told that even on some of the iow runs on the flats of Canterbury the average for merinos is only 35 per cent. ; that in ordinary years the lambing has not been more than 35 per cent. Even in the paddocks you do fairly well if you get 80 per cent, from merinos. I say this because I was thinking you put the average rather high when you said 65 per cent. I—l1 —I may say that we have had exceptional lambing of 82 per cent. Last lambing season we do not take into consideration on account, of the snow, but the year previous the lambing was only 39 per cent., and the previous year to that it was 42 per cent. 148. Then, how do you make your average 65 per cent. ? —That is it as nearly as possible. 149. Did you get a lower price for j : our wool after the snowstorm than j-ou did in the previous year ? —Yes, I think so, as far as I know. Judging by the reports of the wool that was sold, I think the price was lower. 150. Was there a very bftd break? —There was a considerable break. 151. Because, if so, the wool would be lighter, and would therefore bring a better price? — It was lighter, but I do not know that it was much lighter. A great number of the sheep were casting their wool, and there was not the quantity shorn off. 152. I think the price was higher that year than the average for the two or three years before? —Wool that has been sold of this last shearing has not brought the same price as the wool of the previous year. 153. Mr. Ell.] What is the name of the firm you manage for? —Kobert Campbell and Sons. 154. How long have they been in possession of this run? —That I am not sure of. 155. How long have you been there? —I have been in charge of the run for five years. 156. How long have you been on the run? —Since 1891. 157. Has the producing-capacity of the run gone down since you have known it? —I do not think so, for the simple reason that it was at its full carrying-capacity in 1894. It was then carrying about ninety thousand sheep We have never been able to get our stock up to that number since. Some parts of the run are absolutely bare of grass. Ido not think that these are extending in any noticeable degree. 158. Are. the native grasses holding their own —are they standing? —They are merely holding their own. 159. Have you made any attempt to grass the land? —Yes; we have sown a considerable quantity of grasses. 160. With what success? —Indifferent. We were fairly successful in localities which were favourable, and where there was plenty of moisture and shelter; but on dry ridges exposed to the wind and the sun the sowing was an absolute failure. The fiat country is subject to droughts, and so on. 161. What grasses have you tried on your run? — Principally cocksfoot and Chewing's fescue. 162. Do you know whether your employers make any complaint as to the term of the lease? — Yes, I think they do, with regard to (he compensation for improvements. 163. With regard to the length of the lease —they are satisfied with that? —Yes; in fact, I think they would rather you gave them the option of surrendering. 164. What do you mean by "the option of surrendering"? —To give them a chance to surrender the run. 165. To throw up the lease? —Yes. We do not want an extension of lease. 166. Hon. Mr. Duncan.] What cause do you show the Committee that would lead the firm to get rid of the lease? —I am not in my employer's confidence in one sense; but that was suggested to me by my superior officer in New Zealand. 167. They want to get rid of it? —Yes. 168. But they have not given you any idea of the reason for that? —No. I do not know anything about their financial position or their profits or losses. 169. Mr. Harding.] What rent do you pay i- -£1,350. 170. The Chairman.] When does the lease expire? —There are two blocks. The lease of one block, of some 70,000 acres, expires in 1912, and the lease of the remainder of the run in 1916. 171. Do you know what your employers complain of—that the run is not sufficiently profitable?- I think so. 172. Is there any remedy you would suggest that would put it in a better position—security of tenure, or reduction of rent, or extension of lease?—A reduction of rent would be acceptable, with full valuation for improvements at the termination of the lease, so as to encourage us to improve the country —to subdivide and sow surface grasses. 173. You believe the run could be materially improved if a greater value for improvements was allowed ? —Y'es, I think so. 174. Could it be improved co as to largely increase its carrying-capacity, do you think?--We would not wish to try to do that.
I.—sc.
JAMES SUTHERLAND.)
13
175. Do you suffer in any way from the rabbit nuisance?— Yes, considerably; but the rabbits have been considerably reduced. On the other hand, however, our expenses in connection with Hie work are increasing. 176. Is the rabbit nuisance on the decline, or is it increasing I— The rabbits are certainly decreasing —getting fewer in numbers —consequently, the expense of killing them is greater. You have to employ the same number of men, if not more, and they have to travel over a greater area; consequently, you have to pay a higher figure per head. I should like to correct one statement that I made, Mr. Chairman. I stated that our rent was £1,350. That is for the Crown land only. We lease a University endowment of 94,000 acres, for which we pay £3,000 over and above the £1,350. 177. Mr. Harding.] The sheep run over the whole area? —Yes. 178. Mr. Ell.] What relief are you asking for?—We would ask for a reduction in rent, and full valuation for improvements at the termination of our leases. We would ask that if we could surrender them or they were put up to competition we should be allowed full compensation for whatever improvements had been effected. 179. That is the nature of the relief you ask for in consequence of the loss of sheep—reduction in the rent? —Yes. 180. If you were renting a run from a private owner would you expect him to grant you any relief? Is it usual for a tenant of a private owner's run to get any relief if he experiences a bad year,'or meets with misfortune, and loses sheep or crops through a storm? —I do not really know whether it is usual or not. I think I have heard of oases wheie it has been done. William Buhnett examined. (No. 7.) Mr. Burnett: Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen, —I have here a short written statement, and it will save time if I read it to you. 1 want first, however, to bear out what Mr. Sutherland has said about the idea that Dalgety and Co. (Limited) own all these runs. They have far too much sense to own land in central Otago. They only act as agents. Morven Hills Station belongs to two individuals, of whom, unfortunately, lam one. This written statement of mine is borne out by our balance-sheets, and Mr. McWhirter, our manager, will bear out what I say in it. It is as follows: Sir, I appear as a partner in the Morven Hills Station to ask you either to accept a surrender of our country or to make such concessions as will enable us to exist. The capital of the original partnership formed to work this property was £142,000. In 1882 this was written down to £100,000, afterwards to £50,000, then to £38,000, and when again adjusted after the snowstorm of 1903 will probably stand at £20,000, or the sum we have actually expended in permanent improvements. In the three years following 1882 we lost in cash £18,855, and have lost money ever since till the last three years, and were in hopes of at least getting some interest, not on our money lost, but on the capital written down. These hopes have been blasted by the great storm of 1903, and we now can only ask your consideration. The late Sir John McKenzie, a practical farmer himself, not only reduced our rents after the terrible storm of 1895, but also lengthened the term of our leases; and in New South Wales the Government have, since 1892, reduced the rentals on pastoral holdings from £447,656 to £125,000--a concession of £322,656 --in order to preserve a great industry. Personally, I would ask you to take our country -365,000 acres will go far to allay the earth-hunger existing in Otago. I beg to hand you .i statement of the returns for the last ten years of our working, also a statement of the returns for twenty-one years —since I was a partner —and I will ask Mr. McWhirter, who has been in charge of the property, to give you some information as to the losses of stock during his management. In doing so I would like to state that we have always had the fullest confidence in his ability and integrity, and have felt that if any man could have made our property successful financially he could have done so. I mention this because it might be said, " You have not had a good manager," and I wish to say that we have had a good manager. I will also ask Mr. Scaife, of Mount Pisa Station, to give evidence as to the excessive rentals paid hy Morven Hills in comparison with neighbouring runs. That is all my statement. And if you will allow Mr. McWhirter who has been the practical manager of the station to appear I shall be glad. 181. Hon. Mr. Duncan.] You said that the New South Wales Government had reduced rentals by £322,000: that could not be on account of a snowstorm? —Oh, no; but sheep-farmers, since the time of Noah, seem to have been perseculed people. The drought was the destroying agent in New South Wales. I was merely pointing out that the New South Wales Government thought the industry was so valuable that they made that concession in order to keep the men on the ground. 182. The drought was a more serious matter to them than the snowstorm was to us?— Every man has to carry his own burden, and, surely, ours has been a grievous one. I was only mentioning it as a matter of policy. 183. It seems a reflection by you on the Government if they do not reduce your rents also? — Oh, no; I was simply quoting that another and neighbouring Government did this. I certainly would not reflect on the Government. 184. You gave the New South Wales case as a reason why assistance should be given here? — I gave also as a reason that this Government did the same thing before; so that I cannot be reflecting on you. I was thanking the late Sir John McKenzie for his concessions. 185. But the Government had no statement that the New South Wales Government made such a reduction at that time? —Oh, no. _ 186. So that Ido not see how the New South Wales reduction would apply at all to us?—lt is merely a matter of policy as to whether an industry is worth preserving. The New South Wales Government may have thought it was, and they made that reduction in order to keep their country occupied.
I.—sc
14
[THOMAS MCWHIRTER.
Thomas MoWhirtbr, Manager of Morven Hills Station, examined. (No. 8.) Mr. MeWhirter: I would just like, Mr. Chairman, to cast a little light on the losses of July of last year. The number of sheep on the run at the beginning of shearing, after deducting sheep sold and killed up to that, should ha\e been 70,874. There were shorn 39,290. That would be at the end of December. That showed a loss of 31,584 for the year. The ordinary death-rate of the station is not deducted from that. It would be a little over 6,000, taking the rate at 9 per cent., which was the average for the year before. Deducting that death-rate there would be a loss of slightly over 2:5,000 sheep by the snowstorm of July twelve months ago. I have a statement here which goes back over eleven years I suppose it is needless that I should take each year separately? 187. The Chairman.] You can put the statements in? —Thank you. 1 would like to state that during this period there was a loss of 173,000-odd —that is, for the eleven years—the average being 18 per cent. 188. Hon. Mr. Duncan.] Is that including the two bad years? —Yes. 189. Mr. Bennet,] What would your average be leaving those years out, or taking them at the same percentage as the other years ?--About 12 or 13 per cent. As to the lambing for that period, there were marked 147,000 lambs, the average being 50§ per cent. The percentage of loss of hoggets at shearing-time over that period was 26 per cent. The next statement that I have here goes back ten years further than the other. It is to show the Committee that the losses have not been occurring simply in recent years The statement goes back to 1883-84 and comes down to the [iresent year. The total loss of sheep during this time —over twenty years —-was 288,000. The lambs marked for the same time were 358,000, the average being 50| per cent. The hogget-loss for that period of twenty years was 21£ per cent. This statement gives the particulars of the stock that has been bred on the station. There is another statement here which shows the number of sheep bought and sold over a period of ten years, commencing with 1893-94. The number of sheep sold during the period was 49,000, and the number bought —mostly to restock after the 1895 calamity —was 20,930. 1 have also some figures here regarding the rabbit question, if it is desired that I should deal with it. 190. The Chairman.] Very well? —During the period from 1890-91 to 1903-4 —fourteen years —the disbursements on rabbiting were £58,000, the average expenditure being £4,143 per annum. The number of men employed during the same period averaged 157 per annum. 191. Mr. Harding.] Are those figures net or gross? —Those are the gross figures, but they do not cover all the expenditure. They are the actual cash-disbursements. I have also here a statement of profit and loss from 1892 to 1904. In 1892 the loss was £2,800; in 1893, £3,766: in 1894, £4,823; in 1896, £24,748—that was on account of the disaster. In 1897 there was a profit of £954; in 1898 a loss of £644; in 1899 a profit of £8,806 —this was the year when wool was at a high figure, and we happened to strike the market. In 1900 there was a loss of £228; in 1901 a profit of £2,281 ; in 1902 a profit of £4,192; in 1903 a profit of £5,051 ; and the present year, 1904, shows a loss of £11,836. During this period of twenty years, Mr. Chairman—from 1884 down to 1903-4 —the total amount paid in rents for the property that I am in charge of was £115,052. Sheep rates, local County rates, and property-tax took £5,541; this amount and that paid for rents making together a total of £120,593. I might also state that from 1883 to 1888 the rental of Morven Hills was £10,300-odd. It was at the 1882 sale that the rents were fixed —competition was so keen that they were run tip to that figure. The expenditure on the station —that is, the cheques that I have drawn for the working of the property for that same period of fourteen years from 1891 to 1903-4—amounted to £105,592. That was for wages, &c, and does not include rents at all —they are paid by Dalgety and Co. (Limited), in Dunedin. The rabbiting, of course, represents £58,000 out of that amount. In regard to the carrying-capacity of the property, from my own personal knowledge I can say that it has depreciated very considerably during the last quarter of a century; and, to render matters worse still, during the snowstorm of July twelve months the frost was so intense that it killed many of the native shrubs which were very useful to vs —the lea-tree, for instance That was utterly killed from one end of the property to the other. We found it of great service to the sheep and cattle at the time of the snowstorm. This tea-tree is different altogether from the manuka —it is a much finer plant, and is a really good stock-fodder. 192. The Chairman, j It is not our cotton wood ? --No. 193. Hon. Mr. Duncan.] Was it the highest part of the run that this shrub grew on?-- -No; it was mostly on the low-lying country. 194. Mr. Wood.] How long have you been managing the estate? —Ten years this month. 195. Then, you can only speak of the time you have been on it? —For the ether years I took the figures from the station books. 196. How many head of cattle do you carry on the station? —About five hundred head usualty. 197. You did not mention them —you only mentioned sheep? —The loss of cattle was so light that we did not think it worth while taking it into account. The number lost was small. 198. Have the rabbits been a great nuisance to you? —They have been and are still. It is expensive to keep them under. 199. The skins do not bear the expense? —Not by a long way. In some years they go very r.lose to it, but in some years there is a very great deficiency. 200. What do you value the sheep on the station at, as at last shearing? —Taking the class that I know were sold last year after shearing, I should say the value would be pretty well 15s. a head, taking the young and old, without the wool. 201. What was the value of sheep when you went to the station?-—lt was very low at that time, if I remember rightly. 202. And yet you show a loss from that time right on? —The numbers were very much reduced. 203. Sheep were very low at that time, but now they are worth 15s. each? —Of course, sheep fluctuate greatly in value in the colony. I think at that time they were low in price.
L— 5c
THOMAS MCWHIRTER.]
15
204. And wool was low? —Yes. 205. Since then it has gone up? —Yes; but it has been down too. 206. But, notwithstanding the increased price of wool and mutton, there is a loss? —Yes, that is so. 207. Mr. Bennet.] Are the rabbits in any way reduced with you now, or are they as bad as ever ? —They are greatly reduced ; but the scarcer they get the more expensive it is to deal with them. 208. Do not their natural enemies assist? -To some extent, I believe; but they do not seem to be increasing very rapidly. They are, no doubt, doing good. 209. There are a great many killed by trapping? —Yes; that is inevitable where trapping goes on. 210. Mr. J. II . Thomson.] How much did your employers lose last year after paying all expenses? —The statement given me shows v loss of £11,000. These accounts are made out in the Dunedin office. 211. That was the loss in the year when you lost so many sheep?-—lt is the last twelve months' loss —the 3'ear 1903-4. 212. Mr. Bennet.] The last balance-sheet shows that loss of .£ll,ooo?—Yes. 213. Mr. J. W. Thomson.] And you lost £58,000 during fourteen years on the rabbits? We spent that sum of money on them. 214. Mr. Witty.] Could you give me an idea of what the value of sheep was ten years ago? — I could not state it very correctly from memory, but I know the price was not very high. An average station line of merino sheep would probably have been worth about 6s. per head. 215. They were less than that, were they not?- Some of the old sheep went down to a very low price—yes. 216. You valued the sheep at 15s. each off shears. Of course, your losses would be prior to shearing ? —Yes. 217. Their having their fleeces would enhance the value of the sheep? —They were valued in this instance at 15s. per head, but they were undervalued. The ewes and lambs were worth considerably more. Old ewes after shearing are worth 15s. As it happened the market was bare of stock at that time. It is almost impossible to get young breeding-ewes now for our country. 218. The bulk of your sheep, of course, are merinos? —Principally. 219. And the oldest naturally die the easiest? —In this instance it was not so. We lost quite as heavily among the young sheep as the old ewes. 220. Do you keep many wethers? —Yes; we have a large wether flock. 221. Did you lose many wethers? —Not so heavily as with the ewe flock. We lost probably about 10 or 12 per cent, less wethers than ewes. 222. Was your loss heaviest in ewes or hoggets? —The percentage of loss was heaviest in the hoggets. 223. Do you not think that 15s. would be rather a high value for merino wether hoggets? —It might be for them, but this was the average taken all over the flock. If they had been taken separately it would, I grant, have been an extreme price to put on wether hoggets. But that value was placed on the whole lot as an average. 224. It would be an extreme price for wethers too? —Yes. 225. How long have those who now own the run had it? —I am not sure, but it must have been somewhere about thirty years. 226. Do you know what rent they were paying during their last lease?— Yes. After the 1895 disaster the rent was reduced to the present amount —from £4,500 to £2,750 —and this sum, we submit, is excessive now, compared with the rent of similar country adjoining us. If you will be kind enough to hear my neighbour, Mr. Scaife, who occupies the adjoining station, he will try to show to you that our country is excessively rented. The country is similar, and he holds about half the area that we hold, but there is a great disparity in the rent. 227. You were paying £4,500 and you are now paying £2,750? —Yes. 228. Have not the last ten j-ears been better times for the runholders? —They would have been but for these disasters. The losses being so heavy, it is impossible to get up the number in order to take advantage of the rise in prices. 229. What number were you carrying ten years ago? —Ten years ago, when I took charge we sheared 93,000. That was before 1895. ' 230. Were not merino ewes off the station selling at 2s. to 2s. 6d. each ten years ago? Yes • old sheep were, I believe. 231. And wethers too—in fact, old merino wethers sold at Is. ? —Yes; culled sheep. 232. And the ewes now —of course, you have taken the average —are worth 15s. on the station ? -Yes, according to the market prices now. 233. For the last five or six years they have been selling well, and wool lias gone up considerably within the last ten years?—lt has only been within the last two or three years, at most, that we have had anything like decent prices for culled merino sheep of any kind. The difficulty has been to sell them in our part of the rruntry. 234. Have not culled stal ion ewes for the last two or three years been bringing from 10s. to I i~~~x 6S. 235. Therefore, you could do with less stock and still make a bigger profit than you did ten years ago?—lt might be possible. You will understand that our returns from surplus stock are very small indeed. 236. You sold about 49,000 and bought about 20,000, leaving about 29,000 sold net?— Yes 237. In high country you do not expect to sell so many ewes, do you?--To keep up the numbers of the place you must keep on adding ewes to the flock.
L—sc
16
[THOMAS MCWHIRTER.
238. During the last ten years, I take it, you have paid altogether £283,000-odd in wages, destruction of rabbits, and rent. Can you give us any idea of what the income has been? —I can give you nothing beyond the statement that I have read with regard to profit and loss over that period. 239. You have been losing pretty nearly every year? —That is patent. 240. And you have been practically living on your losses? —That is so, unfortunately. 241. What concession do you wish the Government to give you? —I have studied the matter ■very carefully, and I am satisfied that nothing short of a very substantial reduction of rent would be of any use whatever. An extension of lease would only be prolonging the agony. The price of sheep is now so high that it is impossible to buy ; and, as to breeding, it will take many years before the stock comes up to sufficient numbers to give any return to the owners after paying working-expenses. Nothing short of a very substantial reduction of rent would be of any service. 242. Not a longer lease?-—lt would be of no use. There is still six years of the old lease to run. 243. Mr. Ell.] You say the carrying-capacity of the run has fallen off considerably? —Yes. 244. What is the reason for that?— The native grasses seem to die away. I do not know whether it is natural decay or a natural process; but all the country with a northern aspect is exposed to the north-west wind, and is very hot and dry, and there the grasses have all practically disappeared. And this fungus that has been mentioned has taken possession of all the hard, dry country. It works round, and the country gets completely covered with it. That process has been going on now ever since I have been there. 245. Have you or your firm made any attempt to regrass any portion of the land? —No, not to any extent. I did try in a small way, but it was not stressful. I tried cocksfoot and Chewing's fescue in some of the gullies, but not to any extent. 246. You were not successful at all?- Not what I call successful. 247. Would a systematic effort to regrass be successful, do you think?—! believe that in many parts —in the gullies —it might be done. 248. That would improve the carrying-capacity of the run, of course? —There is no question of that; but it would have to be done on an extensive scale to be of much service. 249. What is the usual term of your leases? —The last lease was for fourteen years. 250. Does your firm complain about the liability of their being turned out of possession ar the expiration of the lease through being outbid by somebody ?--No, I should not think so, provided compensation were given for improvements. The lease only makes provision for compensation to the extent of three years' annual rental being paid; but this amount would not nearly cover the improvements on Morven Hills. There is a great amount of fencing there and other improvements. 251. Would the right of renewal at the end of your present term be more satisfactory to you rhan your present lease without the right of renewal? —Provided one held the run at a reasonable rental the right of renewal would certainly be some inducement to improve the country. 252. Do you think it would be a great inducement to improve the country and to restore it? — Yes. Of course, many runs might not be improved to any extent, but others would, even in central Otago. 253. What number of years do you think should be the original term of lease? —I do not think lie term should be for anything less than twenty-one j-ears, or there would not be any encouragenent for any lessee to make improvements to any extent. 254. If you had the right of renewal at an assessed rental from fourteen years to fourteen /ears, would that be satisfactory? —Ob, yes; anything like that would do. 255. Mr. Bennet.] Have you ever tried the Yorkshire fog? —No. I do not think it would be advisable in that country. 256. You think it would not take in the gullies? —It is of very little use, indeed. It covers the surface in moist places, but there is very little nourishment in it. 257. The Chairman.] Do you think the valuation for improvements is too limited? —I think so. It will not nearly recompense the outgoing tenants for their outlay, even allowing for depreciation. 258. Do you think it would be wise to do away with any restriction as to the amount of valuation for improvements, and to leave the valuation an open question —leave the improvements to be valued 1-1 think that would be better than the present system. 259. Do you think that might lead to improvements of a useless character being made? — No. Ido not think any one would spend money lavishly. Possibly that might be resorted to in some parts of the country, but not in our part. 260. Do you think that any of the country you are acquainted with could be made more valuable supposing that that restriction was removed ?--Yes. That would certainly be of great benefit to the owners of Morven Hills Station, and to the holders of the country generally; because, even by subdividing the runs more, the carrying-capacity could be increased, and, as the Minister of Lands has indicated, the country could be spelled at a certain time of the year. We do that for a part of the year, and if more fencing were put up the land could be spelled for a longer period. Of course, it would take a larger outlay to do that; but Ido not think any one would expend money for the mere sake of doing it. [Statements re Morven Hills Station returns handed in by witness. ] W. A. Scaife, of Mount Pisa Station, examined. (No. 9.) 261. The Chairman.'] We shall be glad to hear you, Mr. Scaife ?—I merely came here, Mr. Chairman, to give any information I could as to the'respective rents for Mount Pisa and Morven Hills Stations, and as to the carrying-capacity of the two places. I went to Mount Pisa in 1896, after the 1895 winter, and the rents were readjusted, we being offered a fourteen-years lease at £1,140. A short time after that we could see that the place was not going to pay, and the owner
17
W. A. SCAIFE.]
I.—sc
surrendered the property. It was then pnt up, but no offer was made for it at all. We were then offered a lease by the Government at £350 from year to year. We took the place for one year, and it was taken for another year at the same rate. At the end of that term the Government fixed the rent at £500 for a lease of twenty-one years, which my employer accepted. There was no competition whatever for the lease at that figure. At the same time an adjoining property was put up - -the Wanaka Run. It was subdivided. That place carries eleven or twelve thousand sheep, and the rental is £100 a year. At the present time we shear from thirty to thirty-two thousand sheep per annum —this last year the number was down to twenty-eight thousand —and we pay £500 a year. At Morven Hills they shear from fifty to sixty thousand sheep per annum, and are paying £2,780; and the risk is quite as great on the Morven Hills country as it is on our country. lam perfectly satisfied that had we retained the country at the rental we were paying immediately after 1895 we should have been in the same position —coming to you for relief now; but as we have the country at a fair rental we do not have to approach you. We are able to take the good with the bad, and feel in a more independent position than many other unfortunate people at the present time. That is the feeling that the tenants of the pastoral runs should have. You, Mr. Chairman, have been asking two or three of the witnesses as to valuation for improvements. I feel confident that were the Government to givs pastoral tenants security —such security as one gentleman here suggested, i.e., a lease for fourteen years, with right of renewal for fourteen years further —and full valuation for improvements, you would find at the end of the tenure grass-seed would have been sown, and the country would have improved generally, and would return to the Government greatly enhanced in value. As to the state of things at present, I can quote you a case where a man has 20,000 acres of Government land leased to him. He got it in 1896, and his lease expires in 1910. At the time he got it that place was burdened with £200 for improvements. He paid that sum for his share of the boundary-fence. He has erected buildings and wool-shed —at as small a cost as he could do it —has ploughed up a certain area of ground, laying it down in grass, and has cut hay for his stock for the winter. That man pays £37 10s. a year rent, and paid £200 in cash on going to the place. He is in this position :At the end of his lease, for his thousand pounds' worth of improvements he will get £187 10s. —five years' rent —as valuation for improvements. He therefore must stay there and take everj'thing he can get out of that land. If he had full valuation for improvements he could afford to go on improving the country, and if he lost the property and the Government put the run up the country would be more valuable. Then, a man wishing to buy the lease would have to be prepared to pay for the improvements, and they would start to bid on a fair footing. But at present the man to whom I refer has got to take all he can out of the land. Under the Act he has the right, I think, to remove the fencing and buildings, and he returns the ground to the Crown valueless —greatly deteriorated. This man's case is a particularly hard one. He has tried to sell out, but has no hope. I feel confident that were the Crown tenants of some of these places allowed to fence in small areas where such areas are suitable and can be got, and to lay them down in grass and provide hay for bad winters; and were the Crown tenants to get valuation for these small paddocks, the fencing thereon, and probably any irrigation-works that might be necessary in connection with growing the hay —it would help them to keep their stock alive —it would give them a great incentive to preserve winter feed, and to improve their country generally. 262. Mr. Ell.~\ Has the carrying-capacity of your run gone down at all? —Yes; I reduced it immediately the rents were reduced after 1895 —I reduced the stock. The books showed 45,000 when I went there; now I never start the winter with more than 34,000. 263. Is the value of the country for grazing purposes decreasing or improving? —It has not been improving. It will improve with the reduced stock that is on it. It is coming back slowly. We have had very dry seasons. If we could get moisture the country would recover, I feel certain. Walter Wilson, Manager of the Hawkdun Station, examined. 10.) 264. The Chairmnn.] Will you proceed, Mr. Wilson? —I will not detain you many minutes, sir. lam manager of the Hawkdun Station, leased by Captain Dalgety. There are 56,780 acres in this station. The lease is for twenty-one years from the Ist March, 1896, and the yearly rent is £300. As to our losses last year, we started the winter with 13,411 sheep, and we shore 8,370, leaving a loss of 5,041. I might state that I have been on the station only about three years, and can give you the figures for the two preceding years if you wish. In 1901 we started the winter with 12,303 sheep, and we shore 10,216. The shortage for that year was 2,087, or 17 per cent. In the following year —1902 —the total number of sheep that we started the winter with was 16,497. We bought nearly seven thousand between that year and the year before; and we shore that year 13,819, the shortage being 2,678, and the death-rate 16 per cent. The total shortage of sheep on the station for these three years was 9,806. 265. The Chairman.] What was the percentage of loss for 1903? —About 38 per cent. The lambing for 1901 was 57J per cent. ; for 1902 it was 24 per cent. ; and for 190-3, 40 per cent. Our average amount of wool per sheep was about 6| lb. in 1901 and 1902. Last year it was 5} lb. 266. Mr. Ell.§ With regard to the carrying-capacity of your run, is the value of the run for grazing purposes decreasing? —No: personally I cannot say that it is. There was a big loss on the place in 1895, and since then it has been only half-stocked. I have seen it at an advantage since I have been there. 267. From your observation of the ground, are the native grasses dying out? —Yes, to a certain extent they are. 268. Are you making any efforts to replace them by sowing? —I have done a little, but very little.
3—l. sc.
18
I.—sc.
WALTER WILSON.
269. What success have you met with?—l have done so very little sowing that I could not say what the results will be. The lowest ground we have is something over 2,000 ft. high, so you can imagine that we cannot grow very much there. 270. The Chairman.] The rabbit nuisance, I suppose, is kept well under?- Yes. The rabbits are not bad with us. The station is about £50 a year out of pocket by the rabbits. The rabbit question is not a big one with us.
Fbidat, 9th September, 1904. A. K. Lyons, Inspector of Properties for the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company (Limited), examined. (No. 11.) 1. The Chairman.} You represent the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company, and I think you said some other people? —Yes. I am inspector of properties for the Loan and Mercantile Agency Company, and I wish to speak as to their losses and also the losses of one or two clients. The runholders of South Canterbury also have asked me to represent them, and answer any questions the Committee might wish to ask me. I have this letter, dated the 3rd September : "This is to give Mr. A. Lyons power to give evidence before the Lands Committee on behalf of all the Canterbury pastoral tenants re the snowstorm of July, 1903. I may state that I liave talked the matter over with most of the Canterbury pastoral tenants, and they all think it would be fair if the Government would extend the leases for another term of fourteen years. I may state that the Canterbury pastoral tenants do not wish to ask for reduction of rents." This is signed by Mr. Bernard Tripp, and also by Mr. William Grant. [Letter handed in.] I wish now to deal with the losses on the runs with which we are concerned—the Balmoral and Glenmore Runs in the Mackenzie country. On the 30th June, 1903, there were on the books 36,587 sheep. At the shearing of December, 1903, and January, 1904, there were shorn 22,783, a shortage of 13,804. Deducting from that number the killings and the average loss, which, extending over a period of seven or eight years, is 8 per cent., there is left an actual loss through the snow ot" 10,459. The average annual loss is 2,920. As far as we can get at the true state of affairs, of that number of 10,459 there were lost on a private leasehold 2,114, which leaves the number lost on the Crown leasehold 8,345. I value those sheep at £6,284 ss. That amount is made up in this way: There won l 3,800 breeding-ewes in lamb —I may state that they were all young sheep that we lost —and these ewes we value at £1 per head. That is £3,800. There were 2,851 hoggets, at 10s., £1,425 10s. : and 1,694 maiden ewes and two-, four-, and six-tooth wethers, which, at 12s. 6d. each, come to £1,058 15s. That is how the £6,284 ss. is made up. The shortage of wool on account of the 8,345 sheep lost is placed at £2,080 55., less receipts from dead wool and skins, £727 12s.= £1,252 135., making the total loss £7,536 18s. There were 12,000 ewes put to the ram in 1903, and the average lambing for a number of years being 56 per cent., there should have been 6,720 lambs. The actual number marked was 3,942, a shortage of 2,778. And there were 95,779 lb. of wool short. That is as far as Balmoral is concerned. Mrs. Hayter, of Rollesby Run, near Burkes Pass, whom I also represent —the loss on her leasehold was 1,767 sheep, or £1,660 10s. The lambing on her run was not so bad —there were only 290 lambs lost. Mr. Hamilton, of Ashwick, also asked me to represent him. His losses were 4,300, but I cannot give you full particulars of them. 2. Have you any further statement to make, Mr. Lyons? —Not in regard to the losses; but I would like to mention that I have here some statements by Mr. Tripp. I cannot vouch for them myself, but they can easily be verified if necessary; and I am sure Mr. Tripp would not have made (hem unless they were correct. They have rather an important bearing on the question at issue, and are as follows: "Between the Rangitata and Waitaki Rivers the sheep on the hill country have decreased 110,000, taking the sheep returns from 1895 to 1903. The 1904 returns (which would show the snow losses) are not yet to hand. According to a statement of receipts and expenditure for the year ending the 31st March, 1904, the rents of pastoral runs in New Zealand show a riecrease of £16,359 in the one year. The only decreases under Revenue Account were pastoral leases and deferred payments, everything else showing an increase." Mr. Tripp would have brought these statements up before the Committee if he had been here, but he had to go away. As I say, they can easily be verified. 3. Mr. Buchanan.'] Mr. Tripp could only get them from the official sources? —Yes. As stated in the letter which 1 read, and which I indorse, we do not ask the Government to make us any monetary recompense for the losses that we have sustained. We shall be quite satisfied if we have an extension of our tenure. If our tenure can be made more or less secure it will be so much the better. We have had to buy sheep at very high prices indeed in order to restock the country. Most of the leases run out on the Ist March, 1911. As the lambings are not very big in that country, it takes some time to recover losses by breeding up ; and sheep are so high in price. It is not like it was after the storm of 1895. Then sheep were at such a low price that we were able to stock up the country at a moderate cost. After 1895 I bought very large numbers of sheep at prices varying from 3s. 6d. to ss. This year I have had to pay ]6s. 6d. for ewes bought to restock the country. 4. Mr. Witty.'] You referred to the decrease in the revenue from pastoral runs. Has any of that area been sold or let in smaller properties ?—None of it has been sold. Of that I am quite sure, because no Government land is sold now. Even if any had been let as small o- raz i n g_ rmix it would still come under 5. Some of it may have been let for closer settlement—the better portion ?—Some of it misjht have been ; but that would not account for such a large decrease.
L—sc.
A. R. LYONS.]
19
6. You think that none of the area has been cut up for closer settlement? —As far as my own knowledge goes, I should say No; but I was reading to you a statement given to me by another man. 1 think it is possible that some of the area may have been taken for closer settlement, but not a great deal. 7. The Canterbury men ask for an extension of their leases of fourteen years. Do you think it would be wise to lock the land up for that time, as it may be required for cutting up into small runs, which would be more beneficial ? —There is very little country affected by this petition that is suitable for cutting up into small grazing-runs; but if it were necessary to do so, and compensation were given to the tenants in the event of their runs being resumed, that would meet the difficulty. We have no wish to lock up the land if it is required for close settlement; but a great portion of the countrj- is totally unfit for close settlement. 8. What is your idea as to the condition in the leases regarding improvements? Should there be any alteration in regard to that? —Yes. The present system is a very unsatisfactory one. The valuation for improvements is not to exceed three years' rental. Well, that is a very small amount when you come to go into it. 9. What is your idea as to what should be done to improve the condition of things? —I myself do not believe very much in surface-sowing, because I think the country is not suited to it. What, in my opinion, would make things very much better for both the tenant and the State and would improve the country more than anything, is understocking. At the present time, however, there is no inducement to understock. A man naturally wants to get as much as he can out of the land. 10. Is it not a well-known fact that "half-stocking, full profit; full stocking, half profit"? —Yes; but none of these runs are what you would call very heavily stocked, though they would be better if they were more lightly stocked. 11. Is not £1 a head rather a heavy price to put on the ewes on the station? —In this particular instance, and in the case of Mrs. Hayter, they were all young sheep. None of them were over five years old; and you must remember that they were in lamb when the snowstorm took place. 12. Were they merinos? —Yes, and a very good flock too. Both flocks were very good. They had been bred up with a good deal of care. 13. £1 a head seems a good price if they ran up to five years of age? —A number of them were four-, six-, and eight-tooth. You could not replace them for the money. Even in March I had to pay 16s. 6d. for empty crossbred ewes. I could not get merinos. 14. Mr. Flatman.] You say that you do not believe in surface-sowing. That would not apply to the whole acreage of a run, would it? —No. 15. There would be certain portions of it that would be suitable for surface-sowing? —It is a big question. What applies to one run will not apply to another. In parts of the Mackenzie country, where they get plenty of north-west showers, there are gullies that will perhaps grow grass; but over a great deal of the Mackenzie country it is a very dry climate. And you have to consider the elevation. On this run where the homestead is the elevation is 2,500 ft. The lowest portion of the Lake Pukaki Run —which is a leasehold from a private individual —is 1,600 ft. above sea-level. The country runs up to 7,000 ft. high, and the frosts are so severe that surface-sowing in the autumn certainly would not do, because the grass, if it did start to grow, would be lifted out of the ground by the frost. 16. Why not surface-sow in the spring? —Surface-sowing in the spring has never answered very well. 17. There have been some good turnips and oats grown on the Burkes Pass side of Lake Pukaki? —That is on the freehold land which we are leasing. That is lower country, and it has a good aspect. It gets a good deal of north-west rain. It is the only place on which we can grow feed for our horses. On neither the Balmoral nor Glenmore Run is there ground that we could even grow oats on with which to make hay for feed for our pack-horses, &c. 18. What is the height of the ground where the turnips and oats are being grown? —That is over at Lake Pukaki. The height of Lake Pukaki is between 1,500 ft. and 1,600 ft. 19. You would not know the avarage return of the oats per acre? —We never grew oats; we used the stuff for chaff. 20. Mr. Buchanan, .] In attempting surface-sowing what grass have you been trying? —We have tried cocksfoot only. 21. None of the fescues? —No. The experience of other people who have tried Chewing's fescue is that it has not been a success. The other fescues I do not think would grow either. They are too fine a grass. Ido not think they would grow without your breaking the surface. 22. Do you not think cocksfoot is very susceptible to frost? —Yes ; very. That is the objection to it. 23. Then, why try such a grass as that? —It appeared to be the only grass that would give any result. It is a hardy grass, and it gives a certain amount of feed in spring, summer, and autumn. It resists the dry weather well. 24:. Have you any recommendation to make to the Committee as to any particular variety of grass that would be useful for sowing on these runs? —I have never tried them, and Ido not know that they have ever been tried; but it has often struck me that the best varieties of the native grasses would give better results than what we call " artificial " grasses. I should be inclined to consider the blue-grass, which is the best native grass that we know of in the high country. 25. Would not more subdivisional fences be useful in bringing about a better sward of grass, by spelling the country now and again? —No. In this country it does not do to fence too much or you may get your sheep jammed. You have to be very careful indeed how you fence. With merino sheep it does not do to have them in too close subdivisions —they- require a pretty good range. Speaking comparatively, our country is very well subdivided, and we spell it as much as we can. There is one suggestion I would like to make to the Committee, as to what I think would
20
[A. R, LYONS.
L—sc.
be a good thing, but which there is no inducement to do at present. It is this : Given a fair tenure it would pay us all to select suitable spots, wherever we could get them—there are not very many, but there are some—and fence them in and sow oats for hay, thus making provision for a bad winter, which is almost certain to come. It is an absolute certainty that these bad winters will come, and if we could have this hay at different points upon a run we should be able to get our sheep to it by means of snow-ploughs, and so possibly save a good many sheep. At all events, the experiment would be well worth trying. 26. Mr. Witty. .] You could keep the hay for years? —Yes, we could keep it till it was wanted. It is not of much use after being kept three or four years, but if one always had some coming on one could afford to burn the old stuff at the end of the four years, if it was not wanted. 27. Mr. Buchanan.] Have you had difficulty in growing oats in some of these places? —No. We have to select the places, of course- -we could not grow them everywhere; we have to select our ground. At this run in the Mackenzie country —Balmoral —we are, as I say, leasing an adjoiniug freehold, where we grow all our feed. It is about the only place where we could grow it to any extent. 28. Would barley grow to better advantage in a cold climate like that? —No. We have tried barley, and we did not get any better results from it than from oats. 29. You referred to the fact that the sheep that you lost by the snowstorm were mainly young sheep. Would you define what you mean by that term, as applied to merino sheep? —There were none over five years old. They were four-, six-, and eight-toothed and five years old. We had just recovered from the loss of 1895. I had just got the flock back into a proper state as far as ages went, and it was a very good wool flock. Vv T e were just recovering from the losses of 1895 when this last storm came, and it practically wiped out the ewe flock. 30. To what cause do you attribute the great decrease in the number of sheep between the two rivers that you told the Committee of? —The country is deteriorating. It is not carrying anything like the number of sheep that it did. 31. The grass is deteriorating? —There is no question about that. The high country is all going back. 32. Have you any rabbits in that country? —Yes. 33. Are they in any number —so as to affect the stock-carrying capacity? —Not now. We have got them down to a minimum. At one time they were very numerous, and it cost us a good deal of money to get them down, but, by vigorous methods and the expending of a good deal of money, we got them down to such a point that we can keep them down. It costs us between £300 and £400 a year for rabbiting, as extra rent. 34. If the runholders got an extension of their leases what do you think they would do to improve their position, beyond growing this artificial feed for severe winters? Is there any other direction in which they could see their way to lay out money to improve these properties? —No; speaking generally. Of course, there are some runs, such as on the foothills of the Canterbury Plains, where surface-sowing could be done to advantage; but, speaking broadly, over the great extent of the high country of Canterbury and central Otago, in my opinion, surface-sowing is simply throwing money away —unless you get perhaps a few well-sheltered gullies, or something of that sort. Then it might be of advantage. It would be much better if the carrying-capacities of the runs were assessed, and the rents were fixed at so much per head of carrying-capacity, the tenants being debarred from carrying more stock than the assessed number. That, I think, would be the way to recover the country. 35. Mr. Bennet.] Are there no parts of these runs that could be improved by irrigating, if water could be got? —Yes, if water could be got we could grow grass ; but, then, that would be veryexpensive. It would mean constructing water-races, and there is no inducement to the Crown tenant to do anything of the sort. 36. Do you think the tenants would be likely to do that if the leases were for a longer term? I think in some cases it would be done, where the ground was suitable—in fact, it is the only way in which feed could be grown on- some of the runs. 37. In some parts of central Otago a very small holding carries more stock than, I believe, a holding of similar size on the Otago Plains, simply on account of the irrigation of what was considered a waste? —Oh, yes; irrigation would be a very important factor. 38. Canterbury, I believe, does not improve so much as central Otago with irrigation; but still it is marvellous what has been done there with water ? —Yes. 39. That might perhaps be of more service than sowing with artificial grasses?— Yes. Of course, even the best ground on which we sow artificial grasses after a few years —four or five is back in tussock again. The grasses do not last. 40. Are there any of these runs that you refer to which go up to where a number of people are settled? —No; they are all away back in the interior. Mrs. Hayter's run is near Burkes Pass but there are very few people there. At Balmoral we are about four miles from Lake where there is a post-office. There are no oth°r neighbours within fifteen miles. 41. Do you think there would not be any demand for any portions of the run for closer-settle-ment requirements ? —Not there, at all events. 42. Mr. Buchanan.] Speaking of the neighbourhood of Burkes Pass, could you imagine lifting fat cattle of Bcwt,,_ 9cwt., and lOcwt., dressed, in the beginning of the month of September, in view of the condition in which the country is now? —You mean cattle fattened there? 43. Yes?— No. You might get an odd beast like that if you had treated him very well- but certainly no quantity. ' " 44. Out on the run I mean ? —No, you would not. 45. Could you understand my having done so a few years ago?—A few years ago certainly but not now. The country then was full of blue-grass. How many years ago was that?'
A. R. LYONS.]
21
I.—sc.
46. About thirty-two years ago? —That bears out my statement. 47. The Chairman.] I understand, Mr. Lyons, that you think that if there were better security of tenure the runs would be materially improved ? —Yes. 48. Would that improvement lead to the stock-carrying capacity being largely increased?— After a time. It would take some time to do that. As you know, all things take time. 49. I suppose that tenants are afraid to go in for permanent improvements of an extensive character? —Of course, men are who have only a leasehold, when they do not know that they will get it again. We are quite satisfied with our rents. They were high before 1895, but the Government treated us very fairly then and reduced the rents to a fair amount. We are quite satisfied with the rents; we do not want them touched at all. 50. When the leases expire there is the element of competition? —Yes. 51. Raising the rents, 1 presume? —Yes; the rents are put up to auction. It has not been a very good experiment for the Government lately, because a good manj' runs have been thrown on their hands—there has been no competition. 52. Mr. Bennett] If you did improve the runs, under the present law you would be paying for your own improvements afterwards?- -Yes. Whatever system is adopted of putting up runs there ought certainly to be valuation for improvements, or what inducement do you hold out to a man to improve the run. 53. Mr. Witty.\ You say that the runs have deteriorated during these last few years. What has been the cause—overstocking, rabbits, or burning? —I do not think burning has been the cause, as far as Canterbury is concerned, because there the burning has been pretty judicious. In Southland, no doubt, burning has destroyed the runs as much as the rabbits —burning at the wrong time of the year. 54. Therefore the tenants have done a lot to deteriorate their own runs ? —Not in Canterbury. There has not been much of that in Canterbury. The runs are burnt at the right time of the year there. 55. But even in Canterbury I have seen the land, by injudicious burning, ruined for many many years, so that not a vestage of vegetation would grow on it ? —That is true; but they are very careful now. 56. As regards the deterioration in Canterbury, you think it has not been caused by the fire?That is so. The rabbits have been the cause a good deal ifi Canterbury. It is not overstocking, because the country has barely recovered from the storm of 1895. The finer grasses seem to have been eaten out, and there is nothing left but the inferior grasses. You will not see a blade of blue-grass in the Mackenzie country now. 57. I was going to ask you about that —whether it would not pay to sow blue-grass in that country? —As I said just now, 1 think it would be better if the experiment of grass-seed-sowing took the form of sowing native grasses rather than artificial ones. 58. Supposing the Government would allow the tenants grass, or anything else, would they sow it and give it a fair trial? —1 should think so. 59. You stated a short time ago that if you had an extension of lease you would go in more for artificial feed, such as oats and turnips? —Not turnips. The feed would be grown to make provision for a bad season. 60. That would not benefit the run at all. If you were given a longer lease and you only grew artificial feed for your stock you would not be bettering the run at all? —No. 61. If you had an extension of lease it would be only right and proper to try to improve the run by sowing grasses? —Yes. I think there is very little indeed of the high country that would repay the cost of surface-sowing. I say that understocking is the main thing. But at present the rent of the run is so much —we are paying now for this country about £800 a year. 62. What were you paying prior to this? —We were paying £1,123, but we lost country representing a rental of £48 15s. That would make it £1,074 ss. The Government made a reduction in our rental of £274; but then we lost thirty thousand sheep in 1895. 63. Of course, in those days sheep were at nothing like the price they are at now? —No; and there was no difficulty in stocking up again The trouble now is to stock up-—you cannot get merinos. I had to buy crossbred sheep to put on the country, because one could not afford to let it lie idle ; and look at the price one has to pay for sheep. G4. With a little over one-third of the sheep on a good breeding-run you should make almost as much as you would have made with it fully stocked ten or fifteen years ago, owing to the enhanced price of wool and mutton? —The price of mutton does not affect us veiy much. 65. Indirectly it does? —You speak of a good breeding-run. None of these runs are good breeding-runs. That is one of our greatest difficulties. We have not got enough low or breedingcountry in proportion to the size of our flocks. 66. Not enough to keep the number up?— Not enough to keep it up; and the only sheep we have to sell are what we cull on account of age. 67. Mr. Harding.] In reference to what you have just said, do you not think it would be a great benefit, not only to the tenants, but to the State, if there were set aside some small areas— not very large areas—to enable the runholders to breed their stock lower down? For instance you have this big block of high land, and you cannot get stock with which to stock it because the people on the plains breed a different class of sheep. Would it not be a good thing, not only for the tenants, but for the State, to allow you sufficient low country to breed stock in order to keep the high country covered with flocks?— Well, that would be a question, of course. It would depend entirely upon what rental we should have to pay for the low country. The country down below is at" such a high price now that the rental would have to be very high. 68. You practically say that a lot of the high country is" being abandoned because you cannot stock it. Would it not be an advantage to these people to set aside low areas in the way I suggest 1
L— sc.
22
[A. R, LYONS.
In those places it would. But, then, the mischief has been done —the low oountry belonging to the runs has been taken away from them. 69. Just so. I think that is a mistake, and I want to know whether, in your opinion, it would not be well to get back part of it to enable the holders of the runs to go on as in the past? — In some cases it would. Of course, it would enable other country to be let. 70. Mr. Flatman.] Do you think it is more risky in stocking Tip with crossbred sheep in this high country, which is liable to severe snowstorms occasionally, than it is with merino sheep —that is to say, will not merino sheep stand more severe weather than crossbred sheep? —Yes, they will; but you could not get merinos with which to stock it. 71. lam only speaking of the difference between the two classes of sheep. The merinos would be less liable to perish in a snowstorm than crossbreds ? —Yes. 72. Mr. Buchanan.] What about the Cheviot sheep? —On this very run I tried Cheviots. After 1895 I stocked up with a lot of them; but I got rid of them. They live, certainly; but they do not give you any return —they have no wool. 73. Hon. Mr. Duncan.] With regard to what you said about the low counuy : is there any low country that would be suitable for Balmoral ? —Not within a reasonable distance. It is all taken up. I have tried to lease country on which to run our hoggets, but 1 have never been able to get it. It is not available. All (he country about Burkes Pass is taken up and they have got sheep on it. For years I tried to lease the county to send our hoggets to, but could not do it. 74. Is there any large extent of runs round about that neighbourhood that are in the same position ? —Yes ; exactly the same position. 75. There is no low country for them to get within reasonable distance? —No. I forgot to mention, Mr. Chairman, and I would like to mention it now, that I heard members of the Committee asking the witnesses yesterday for particulars of the returns from some of the runs. I can give you the average return from Balmoral from 1896 to 1902. The profit was £8,492 11s. Bd. The loss last year was £1,708 16s. 7d. ; and the total profit for the seven years, ,£6,783, or an average of £969 a year. That is the average profit for seven years on a pretty considerable capital. 76. Mr. Harding.] How many_sheep? —On the leasehold there are 29,000. The total number carried is about 37,000, and the freehold which we lease carries about 8,000 out of the 37,000. [Statements of losses on Balmoral, and Glenmore, and Rollesby Runs through snowstorm of July, 1903, handed in by Mr. Lyons.]
23
I.—sc
APPENDIX. Report on Snowfall, Chamberlain, Albury, Punahoa, Etc. Timaru, 27th July, 1903. I have the honour to report that I have visited as much of the Chamberlain, Albury, and Punaroa Settlements as possible or advisable. The snowfall has been very heavy, and more especially on the low ground; and from present appearances the hills will be clear before the flats. On the Chamberlain Settlement it is impossible to say what the loss will be, as they cannot do anything towards getting the sheep out from the hills. I saw Mr. Winter's son and one of the Wilson Brothers; the latter have only 160 ewes, and have them in the old woolshed and are feeding them. Mr. Winter says he cannot do anything just now. Mr. Hayter was not there, but he has to do the same thing —leave them alone. Mr. Irving, who has been there twenty-two years, never had any trouble on the low ground before; now he has to feed the whole of his sheep, as the snow in places is still 2 ft. deep. On the Albury, Mr. Kennedy, of No. 1 and the small grazing-run, states that so far he has not seen many dead, but he cannot give any estimate of the ultimate loss All others there who have stacks or chaff are not so much troubled; but for any of them it is a very anxious time. On the Punaroa it is also very severe, the more so as, not being expected, none of the settlers were in any way prepared for it. Mr. Leitch and others are trucking the sheep from Fairlie down to near Timaru, as they all estimate it will be fully a month before they can usa the ground again. I tried to see as many of the settlers as possible, but found that as a matter of policy it was better not to see them, as they will soon make their wants known; and if any anxiety is shown for them beforehand they will ask for more. I went on Saturday all round Chamberlain and Albury, and on Sunday Punaroa, and then tried to get to Burkes Pass, but the snow had drifted so much in the night that I had to give it up and return to Fairlie. Gangs of men with dogs are working up on the runs, and are having very rough times, and I am afraid that the death-rate of the stock will be very large. Nothing more can be done at present, and I came home this morning to send you as early a report as possible. It will show to the settlers the necessity' of saving all the straw and of placing it in such positions —that in such times as the present they can make the best use of it. I need not further enlarge upon it any more than to say that all the available strength is but of little account to cope with such a sudden and unexpected fall of snow. If a fortunate northwest wind should come it will help matters more than anything else. W. H. Williams, Crown Lands Ranger. T. Humphries, Esq., Commissioner of Crown Lands, Christchurch.
Report on Snowfall, South Canterbury. Timaru, 9th August, 1903. I have the honour to report that the districts most affected are from the Hakataramea up to Lake Ohau, all the Tekapo, Pukaki, and north towards the Rangitata; on the front range from the Waimate end all along the Hunter's Hill, the Dalgety's, Rollesby, Sawdon, Ashwick, Clayton, Four Peaks, Orari Gorge, Mount Peel, and across the Rangitata. The losses on the various runs, as far as can be ascertained now, vary very much, as, for instance, on the Mistake Station they do not expect any serious loss, while on the Balmoral Station the manager expects almost a total loss. At Simon's Pass the loss is heavy, "while in 1895 they had the low ground clear and could save the stock. The serious part of the present snowfall is that the flats and low ground are even worse than the hills, as the snow is going away very slowly, and any stock on the low ground seem to suffer the most. The settlements that have suffered most are Chamberlain, Albury, Punaroa, and Ashwick Flat. Chamberlain. —Here the tenants are at a great disadvantage, not having any feed in the way of stacks or other feed except what they were buying as the}* wanted; but Mr. John Rutherford came to the rescue and told them all to come to him for either straw, chaff, oats, or anything he had of use to them. He also interested himself by going out and showing the best spots to work the sheep to, and, in fact, had as much trouble as if the place was still his own. There will be a heavy loss on the most of these holdings. Albury. —Here the tenants were better prepared in the way of feed, &c, but in all cases it was some time before they could get about to help the stock, and the fall was very heavy all over. Punaroa — On this settlement there are some very heavy losses, especially with those settlers on the hill country; others again who could feed the sheep have lost very few. Ashvnck Flat. —Here it was simply a sheet of snow all over, and no banks or downs to get the stock on to. The tenants last week were taking the whole of their stock of sheep down to the low country by Raincliff, where some turnip feed had been secured. As many as could be got out have been railed from Fairlie to Albury. From Fairlie, up to Saturday, the 7th instant, there had been 10,836 sheep sent by rail, and about nine thousand by Raincliff on the road. These were from Sawdon, Ashwick Flat, Punaroa, Strathconan, and other small places. From Albury, 3,100 from Mount Nessing Station. There will also be some thousands from Fairlie during the coming week. The small grazing-runs along Burkes Pass will also lose heavily, and from the same cause, the low ground being covered so thickly and thawing so slowly.
I.—sc
24
Another great drawback was the state of the roads, it being impossible for some time to get the feed taken to where it was required. As an instance, it cost £2 per ton to get it carted from Fairlie to Burke'a Pass, and in most places they could only pack very light loads. On the whole the settlers and tenants are very cheerful under the circumstances, and feel very grateful for the help from the Government in moving their stock and taking the feed free for them. It has been a hard and anxious time, and it is only by seeing it on the spot during the worst that it can be realised. I have visited over fifty holdings and my son over Mtj, and I forward a list of details up to the time inspected, but the loss cannot now be stated, and it will not be known until after lambing and shearing, as the sheep, after being so much handled, and also after getting on to feed, are sure to die in large numbers. W. H. Williams, Crown Lands Ranger. T. Humphries, Esq., Commissioner of Crown Lands, Christchurch.
Damage by Recent Snowfall. Department of Lands and Survey, District Office, Dunedin, 9th September, 1903. In accordance with the directions contained in your Memorandum No. 18809 of the 4th ultimo, I requested Messrs. Dallas and Kirkpatrick to accompany me on a tour of inspection through certain portions of this district, for the purpose of ascertaining how the recent snowfall hai{ affected pastoralists and others within the area over which it extended. The result of our inspection goes to show that the storm appears to have been somewhat erratic in its course through the district. The greatest snowfall seemed to have extended from the Waitaki watershed through central Otago via Kakanui and Rock and Pillar Ranges on the south-west side as far as the Clutha River, and thence along this river in a northerly direction to Queenstown, and from there to the head-waters of the Waitaki River. All the country outside this belt experienced severe weather but not sufficiently exceptional to cause a great loss of stock. The extraordinary feature of the snowfall within this area was that on the higher ranges less snow fell than on the lower levels, the consequence being that in many cases the stock on the high levels fared better than those on the low country and plains. Another noticeable point was that on the high and broken country the wind cleared a few of the exposed and sunny slopes, and some of the sheep were enabled, principally by the exertion and assistance of their owners, to get on r.o these bare patches and survive for a time. Within the area affected the depth varied from 15 in. to 42 in. of snow, and this actually fell in less than twenty-four hours. The experience of stockowners is that coming so heavily and suddenly the sheep were unable to make to their usual camps at night, and remained where they had been grazing, or were driven by the storm to the cold and shady sides of the gullies, thus rendering the work of rescue much more difficult than it would have otherwise been, as they had to be searched for all over the country on which they had been running. By reference to the notes taken in connection with each station or farm visited, it will be seen that the estimated loss varies greatly according to the position and conditions of each. In some cases the loss on the small farms will be but very little, as the limited area and number of stock rendered it an easy matter to bring them into the homesteads and hand-feed them with hay, oaten sheaves, and roots, of which fortunately there happened to be in most cases a plentiful supply this season. As the area of holdings increased, the difficulty of feeding also became greater with the further difficulty that in the case of the majority of the larger runs it was impossible to reach the sheep at all. The more energetic of owners or managers were, however, out daily making tracks through the snow, clearing patches of tussock, and dragging the sheep on to these cleared places. This work entailed great hardship and exposures, and only the more vigorous were enabled to carry it out. In the cases of the largest runs this means of rescue was rendered almost impossible, except in one or two instances. Another difficulty was that in some cases the wind had no effect in baring the country and all efforts were ineffective, as there was no country or tussock on to which the sheep could be dragged or taken. By our attached notes and tabulated estimates, it will be seen that the loss will not be so great as at first anticipated, although sufficiently serious to constitute a great aggregate mortality, and also in almost every case considerable individual loss. Tn many instances it means financial difficulties, and in others the work of years to recover lost ground. Tn the greater number of the properties or lessees visited by us a measure of relief would be greatly appreciated, and we think also it would be necessary to enable them to carry on and recover the loss now sustained. It might be added here that the estimated present shortage of stock will be greatly increased between this and shearing, more especially among the ewe-flock, many anticipating a great mortality during lambing-time among both ewes and lambs. This shortage cannot be made good for years, as the present prices and decrease of sheep all round will render it impossible to restock except by the natural increase of each man's flock. Tn the accompanying statement showing the result of our inquiries we desire to point out that the runs, farms, &c, visited by us represent —more especially as regards the pastoral leases —the greater number of those who suffered considerable loss through the snowfall. A great many others, however, have had their stock and resources severely tried, and will no doubt require and apply for relief. The amount involved will, however, we think, not amount to much. -In suggesting a measure of relief we would respectfully recommend (1) that a Relief Bill be made to apply to all Crown tenants ; (2) that claims submitted to the Land Board should be supported by documentary statements and evidence on oath. D. Barron. Wμ. Dallas. Hugh H. Kirkpatrick. The Surveyor-General, Wellington.
25
I.—sc
Notes of Inspection by Messrs. Dallas, Kirkpatrick, and Barton on Damage done by Snow in Central Otayo. Left Dunedin on 10th August, 1903, travelling via Otago Central Railway to Kokonga. On the way we met Mr. Logan, one of the small-grazing-run lessees, and from him we obtained particulars of how the snow had affected him and his neighbours. Taking them in the following order, we find the position somewhat as follows: — 1. R. Logan: He and Mrs. Logan hold 4,700 sheep, running on approximately 10,000 acres. The whole of his country was covered with snow to a depth varying from 12 in. to 24 in. This meant that all the grass and tussock of every description was covered, and remained in that position for upwards of four weeks. The feed had been covered so long that it became necessary for him to remove his young sheep to another part. This he effected by sending 1,700 by rail to Milton, Government providing free railage. This has had the effect of relieving the little open country he had for the old ewes and stronger sheep. He now thinks that by adopting this arrangement he may not suffer a great loss. 2. R. Glendinning, lessee of small grazing-run adjoining Logan, says that although the snow was heavy he was able after the first few days to bring liis sheep to feed, a good deal of which he had stored. Under these circumstances he anticipated but litile loss. ■'!. Kyeburn Station (Scobie Mackenzie's): Mr. Andrews, manager, informed us that he has about 4,000 sheep over the Buster Hill, where it would be impossible for him to reach them. He cannot say much beyond that the chances are against the recovery of many of these. Sheep on the lower faces seem to be lasting out fairly well, while all the younger and ewes (about 7,000) appear to be wintering fairly well. Of the latter all that could be discovered were down on the sunny faces where they will weather the snow and frost. The outlook points to a loss of not more than 20 per cent, of the flock. Although the actual loss may not exceed the above percentage, the lambing is anticipated to prove not only extremely low but also an excessive mortality among the ewes is likely to take place on account of their weak state. A further loss is expected from the poor clip which must ensue after a prolonged starvation. 4 James Howell, the holder of land under various tenures, has had an exceedingly hard time, all his country having been covered throughout. His hill run has 400 sheep, well up on Mount Ida slopes. These he has been unable to see. The bulk of them will no doubt die through cold, snow, and want of food. The lower country was covered to a depth of from 12 in. to 17 in. all over. This continued so long that Mr. Howell had to construct a snow-plough and uncover tho turnips and tussock. The former sufficed for one day's feeding onty, as the frost hardened them so much that the stock could not touch them. This, and the little straw he had, kept those on the northern side of the river. On the southern side he used all his oaten sheaf until he found the sheep were not thriving, when he saw it was necessary to send to Dunedin for both turnips and hay. Through these means and great exertion and worry he has succeeded in keeping the bulk of them alive, although he anticipates a great death-rate and loss of lambs at the lambing-time. When asked if a 30 per cent, loss all over was anticipated, he could hardly express a definite opinion. 5. John Weir was next visited. He holds all low sections, and by steady feeding he does not anticipate more than an average mortality. 6. Mr. Wilson, the holder of about 1,000 acres along the Taieri River, does not anticipate any loss, as he had ample feed to keep his sKeep in good condition. He was in the position of being able to sell feed to Mr. Miller, his neighbour, who was very short of fodder. 7. Puketoi Station: Mr. Charters, the manager, after extraordinary exertion, was able to bring all his sheep from the high country on to the low faces, and by feeding all his best stud and weakest sheep he has succeeded in keeping the bulk of the flock alive, and the result of his work will mean but little loss to the flock as a whole. H. R. Turnbull, lessee of Run 308, Linburn: His ewe country very soon cleared of snow. The tipper country on which the strong sheep — i.e., the two-tooth ewes and wethers, about 14,000 sheep —he has never seen as it is impossible to reach them, the snow averaging 2 ft. in depth. Although Mr. Turnbull is sanguine, appearances point to a considerable mortality among the dry sheep. 9. R. Armour, lessee of small grazing-run along with Miss Armour: These runs were covered to an average depth of 18 in. on the low country and on the tops about 24 in. It lay without a break after the first settlement to an average depth of from 12 in. to 18 in. This meant that all the tussock was covered. The sheep consisted of 4,000 ewes, some of which were old and poor. Mr. Armour had to bring them all down on to the sunny faces and to the vicinity of the homestead. Of this number he fed about 1,200 with oaten sheaves and turnips. The turnips had to be uncovered with snow-plough and the tussock dealt with in the same way, and on these snowplough tracks he sledged sheaves to the flock. The stronger sheep had to find for themselves. At the present time and ever since the snow the weakly sheep have been dying at the rate of ten per day, while the stronger sheep (unfed) have not been inspectd, so that at present the loss is unknown. In any case the mortality can hardly be less than 15 per cent. 10. Peter Law, jun., lessee of small grazing-run: The number of sheep he held at the time of the snowfall was about 600. Immediately he could get at them he removed the greater number, or as many as he could find, and brought them down to his homestead, where he hand-fed them with oaten sheaf. This he continued until he found that the ewes were casting their lambs and dying with too much dry feed. Had it not been for a few turnips he had grown the mortality woufd have been serious. As it is he anticipates a loss of at least a hundred out of 600. 11. R. Shaw, the holder of one of the small grazing-runs lately taken up on Highfield, had 400 first-class ewes. These he left in the snow for about a fortnight. He then brought them down to his father's place, or, rather, the bulk (350) of them, where they have been supplied ever since
4—l. sc.
26
I.—sc
with straw, and consequently the number lest is comparatively few. He, however, anticipates a substantial loss at the lambing-time between weakness of the ewes and loss of those left behind in the snow. 12. J. Shea, holder of small grazing-run, one of the late Highfield blocks, brought his sheep down to the front fence and hand-fed them with oaten sheaf taken from his Wedderburn farm. He described in a somewhat gloomy fashion his anticipated future loss. No doubt this will be considerable, but the cause is attributable to the poor class of sheep he had purchased with wliicli to stock the run. These in an ordinarily severe winter would have suffered a large mortality, which will be naturally increased by the late severe weather. D. Messent, the holder of nearly 1,000 acres and the owner of about four hundred sheep, was able to get his small flock together and hand-feed them for several weeks. About thirty of his strongest ewes died from either hand-feeding or some other unknown cause attributed to the effect of the snow. R. Johnstone and Sons hold several small grazing-runs, on which they run about a thousand sheep. Of these the present loss is about 5 per cent. Hawkdun Station; F. J. Dalgety; Run 228; 14,000 sheep: This run had an average depth of over 3 ft. of snow, both sheep and cattle being unable to move about anywhere for days. The manager, Mr. Wilson, displayed great energy and pluck in proceeding to the head of the Manuherikia River, rescuing about fifty head of cattle and bringing them down to the station, where they were hand-fed for some time. He also set snow-ploughs to work along with men shovelling the tussock clear and dragging the small mobs of sheep on to the bared patches, and by these means he saved a good many that otherwise would have perished. Meantime, although many have recovered, there will still be great mortality among the young sheep and ewes at lambingtime. Apparently the vigorous efforts of the manager saved the run from disastrous loss. He cannot give an estimate of actual loss, although apparently it cannot be less than 4,200. Sixteen hundred hoggets and 3,000 ewes have been hand-fed. The manager will be satisfied if he saves 70 per cent, of the flock. Blackstone Hill Station; Ross and Glendining, lessees; Runs No. ; 36,000 sheep: The losses on the Home Hills portion are very serious. The flock on this block number about 18,000, and of this number not less than from 6,000 to 8,000 must have perished. The shepherd estimates that at least 70 per cent, of the hoggets must have died. In some cases small mobs, varying from twenty to sixty sheep, have been found dead. They have on this part fifteen men skinning sheep at 6d. per head, and at the rate of 600 per day for the last nine days. The manager was seen by us on the 20th, and from him we found that the numbers on Home Hills, Lauder, and Blackstone Blocks were 18,000, 9,000, and 9,000 respectively. His estimate of loss is somewha*. as follows: On the Hills Creek Block there were 6,000 hoggets: of these he expects a loss of 75 per cent —4,500. On Idaburn Block, 2,000 hoggets and young wethers: on these a loss of 50 per cent. —1,000. Of the balance of 10,000 stronger sheep he appears to us over sanguine in saying that the loss will be about 1,500, or equal of Home Hills Block. Total loss, 7,000. On the Lauder Block it is an extremely difficult matter to estimate, as very few sheep are seen dead or alive. He, therefore, hopes for the best. At the same time, he remarked that as the snowdrifts are still heavy, appearances pomt —from the fact that he found several lots buried in the drifts —to many having perished in this way. If this surmise is correct, it may result in a much greater loss than his estimate of about 25 per cent. On Blackstone Hill Block the 9,000 have suffered less than on the other run. This is accounted for by the fact that about 3,000 of these were fed with oat sheaves and hay, and the balance fared better on the warmer faces of this country. The loss on this block will not exceed a thousand. All these make up a total of 7,000, 2,250, and 1,000 —10,250. Roughly speaking, the manager's estimate is ten thousand from the total flock. Judging, how ever, by his description of loss and that given by Messrs. Armour and McDonald (shepherds), and also from the daily tally of sheep-skinning by the fifteen men now at work, and who, according to McDonald, had not more than half overtaken the Hills Creek Block, the loss appears to us to be underestimated on Lauder and Home Hills. Taking these stations, our estimate is about twelve thousand, and if the loss directly and indirectly is not more, we shall be glad to hear about it later on. Laidlaw, Matakanui Run; 18,000 sheep: This run had an average depth of from 2 ft. to 3 ft. of snow. It lay without a break for upwards of four weeks, when a thaw set in for a da}' which partly cleared many of the faces, thus relieving the sheep which had survived. Up till the 24th — that is, twelve days after the snowfall, it was impossible to do anything. Efforts were then made with a grader and "snow-raking" all over the lower country, thus enabling the sheep to get on to and nibble the frozen tussock. The snow-raking was carried on by the shepherds and a band of volunteers from Tinkers'. By their efforts many of the back-country or Five-mile sheep were dragged on to the faces, and the bulk of those so rescued were expected to survive. The disposition of the flock was somewhat as follows: (a.) 2,700 ewes were mostly on 223 d, the balance of the ewes being on the Eastern or Lauder Block. Of the whole, about 70 per cent, will be saved. (&.) On the Blackbush Block the numbers were 2,400 (700 ewes and 1,700 dry sheep). Of the ewes, 200 skins have already been sent in. The dry sheep have not yet been skinned, (c.) On the Fivemile Block there are 1,400 sheep (wethers) doubtful. Tinkers' Paddock contained 400 ewes and 1,700 dry sheep. The former have 100 skins sent in; dry-sheep skinning not yet commenced. Station Creek Paddock: 300 ewes. These have been fed and have fared well. Lauder Paddock: 800 ewes. These will suffer to the extent of at least 200. Wether Hill: About 6,000 were turned out. Snow-raking was started early and the death-rate has been kept down considerably. The balance are in the Station Paddock. It is impossible to make even an approximate estimate. La'idlaw is, however, satisfied that 30 per cent. (5,400) will cover the death-rate. Of course, as in other cases, mortality will be the great loss; a secondary loss will be the loss of ewes at lambing and the poor percentage of lambs that must result from the condition of the ewes. A further loss will be a break in the wool, and, of course, a lower price will be realised,
27
L—sc
Kiuney Bros, and Brown, lessees of three small grazing-runs at present working together; Saw Mr. Brown, who informed us that, although the snow lay to a depth of 17 in., they suffered but little loss so far. After the first five days they drove their sheep on to the shady faces from which the snow had been drifted. On this ground they were able to get at the tussock, and consequently suffered but little. He, however, anticipates a loss at lanibing-time. Mr. A. Kinney saw us on the 26th. He now says their loss cannot be less than 30 per cent, of the whole flock, or that much less in value than last year. A. Jopp; Moutere llun 233, &c. ; 14,000 sheep: The snow on the lower portion fell to ti depth of 18 in., on the higher part about ft. The owe country, extending from SpringvaU to the Chaito Creek and up as far as Wilson's, had an average depth of not less than 20 in. The hogget country from Sjjringvale towards Alexandra and Clyde had upwards of a foot of snow, the balance of the run with the dry sheep had the greatest quantity of snow. The number of ewes was 4,300; hoggets, 2,200; two-tooths, 2,500; wethers, 5,000: total, 14,000. The first of these at first suffered least, as more attention was paid to them in removing them down towards the river, where the tussocks on the sharp ridges were first exposed and the sun reached them earlier in the day. Afterwards, about five hundred of the half-bred were taken in to the home paddock and fed with hay, &c. Apparently the result of feeding has not been very successful, as many of the strongest ewes (carrying twin lambs) are now daily dying, while the tussock ewes are standing the result of the famishing better than the paddock sheep, although a good many are dying, as Mr. Jopp asserts, " through eating their fill, after starvation, of the cold frozen tussock." The hoggets were moved by getting teams of horses to tramp tracks through the snow towards the lower country, and to a certain extent raking and exposing the tussock in patches, and in this way getting them into small lots where they moved more readily about uncovering the stronger tussock. Two-tooths and wethers were well up towards the snow-line fence, and, although the snow was deep, the snow-grass was strongest, and the stronger of the wethers found their way about a little and in this way assisted the younger sheep by making tracks for them. The loss meantime cannot be estimated as many of the hill sheep have been caught in the drifts, and until these thaw they cannot be seen. So far in one drift they have skinned about seventy, and others will expose a similar loss later in the season. Mr. Jopp greatly fears a big death-rate when the spring grass comes away, principally through weakly ewes at lambing and " scour " among the dry sheep. Mr. Jopp will be satisfied if the loss does not exceed 20 per cent, this apart from (1) a poor lambing, (2) weakening of the young and future ewes — i.e., a deterioration in the stamina of the flock, (3) poor clip. W. Paterson; Ayrburn Station; 14,000 sheep: This run is part of the original run held by Mr. Paterson and j)art of original Wanaka Hun. Practically the whole of the latter and the greater part of Ayrburn consists of " dark faces " and no lambing-ground. The lambing has to be carried out on freehold, and even with this assistance to the run the carrying-capacity is only 14,000 sheep. With the exception of 1,200 hoggets all these were on the run at the time the snow fell, and were caught in from 2 ft. to 3 ft. of snow. The depth and the rough nature of the country prevented them from being reached, so that they had to remain in that position until the first thaw set in a month later. After this time they got on to the sunny faces, and now these are eaten out so much that they are compelled to try to move them on to lower country and turnips on the freehold. This is rendered difficult on account of the weak condition of the sheep. This applies more particularly to the ewe-flock. The wethers are still in a bad way, and unless more ground is cleared their condition will not be good. In reference to the ewe-flock Mr. Paterson hardly anticipates any lambing, as the ewes are too weak to mother lambs, so that the loss in country where it is so difficult to breed lambs will be all the more serious. Apart from this future loss the actual mortality is from 20 to 25 per cent. Baird and Elliott; Coronet Peak Runs; 12,000 sheep : This run consists of a series of grouped runs comprising a large area of high and back country. The number carried for the great area held shows that the country is rough, high, and cold. As in the case of Mr. Paterson, the great difficulty is growing a sufficient number of young sheep to keep up the flock. The ewes have to be turned out to run and breed on rough country, the result being a small number of ewes and a low percentage of lambs. Hitherto they have had to stock up by purchase from other runs, and this year it will mean that, with a loss on other stations and the high prices ruling, it will be impossible to stock up from outside sources. Loss, say, 15 per cent. Mount Pisa Station; Dalgety and Co., agents; 32,000 sheep: This run has suffered less than any of those visited, the snow being lighter all over than the others around the homestead. It fell to a depth of 3 in. on the flats and on the lower faces 18 in. At this level and up to the snow-line fences the sunny faces showed black ground quickly, and on these the sheep were moved as soon as possible, although on account of the intense fogs it was impossible to look near the flock for twelve days. The proportion of the various ages and class of stock are as follows: 10,000 ewes, 5,000 hoggets, 17,000 wethers and other dry sheep. Of the first of these, 4,000 were brought down on the low levels and hand-fed with grass and hay. The others were moved from the southerly slopes to the north-east and up to the Cardrona slopes where they weathered it well. From the Roaring Meg to Victoria Bridge and round to the Cardrona there were about 12,000 strong sheep, and the balance from the station to the Lowburn and on the dark faces the snow still lies heavy in places. The sheep seem, however, to have wintered fairly well. The manager states that upon the whole the loss will not be serious —probably not more than 2,000 over the average mortality. D. McKinley ; Runs 10 and 12; 33,000 acres; 3,400 sheep: The average snowfall was about 2f 1. all over the run. It lay for upwards of three weeks without n break and then thawed and froze again, making the snow into ice and thus rendering it dangerous to attempt to move the sheep. The stock held consisted of 2,000 ewes (price paid for 1,100 of above from Mount Pisa 7s. 6d.
I.—sc
28
according to McKinley, and 4s. 6d. according to the manager of Mount Pisa), 360 hoggets, and 1,040 dry sheep. The usual mortality of above is 10 per cent. The probable loss by the snow the lessee would not venture to guess beyond saying that it would be heavy. Morven Hills; Dalgety and Co.; 340,000 acres; 72,000 sheep: This run caught the storm ver} , severely throughout its immense extent. It appears to have been covered to a depth of from 12 in. to 24 in. and the snow remained without a break for four weeks. The lower flats seemed to retain the snow quite as long as the higher country, the winds prevailing in other parts appearing to pass down the Clutlia Valley on the other side, clearing that, but leaving the snow untouched on the iandis side. On account of this the faces cleared very slowly, so that sheep remained without feed for practically a month. A great many were hand-fed, but with such a large flock it was impossible to keep up the supply to more than a small percentage. In addition to this the crops throughout this portion of the district were unusually poor, so that feed was scarce even among the farmers in the neighbourhood. On this account but little hay or straw was available either from the homestead paddocks or by purchase from the farmers. The number f?d at various places and for a limited time only was about 12,000, at a cost of £500. The feeding was only to the extent of keeping them alive, as fodder became exhausted very quickly. The balance of the flock had an exceedingly bad time of it. The ewe-flock between the homestead and Dunstan Creek — 14,000 —appeared to have fared fairly well; the balance of the ewes, although on apparently safer country between Lindis and Northburn, did not escape so well. The hoggets —10,000 —were on the country which apeared to have the least snowfall, and they have escaped as well as could be expected for young stock. The balance of the dry flock suffered very greatly —to what extent it is impossible to say, as the extent of the run prevents it from being inspected throughout so far. Mr. McWhirter is of opinion that the loss may not be quite so great as that of the storm of 1895, where the loss was 52 per cent, of the flock, or 55,000. It will be seen from the number now on the run as compared with that of 1895 that the country is now understocked. The sheep were therefore in firstclass condition, and consequently able to withstand the severity of the weather and loss of feed. Had it not been for this the loss would have been much greater. Spain, lessee of Cairnmuir Block of Earnscleugh Run; 4,700 sheep: Mr. Spain turned ouc the above number of sheep, a considerable portion of which were bought at the end of the season, and were neither strong enough, nor acclimatised, or settled on the country. The flock is composed of the following: 260 wethers, 1,300 lambs (hoggets), and 3,140 ewes. Of the lot, 1,800 ewes were bought as above is, the poorest class of sheep) at the various sales. This leaves, say, 1,300 ewes accustomed to the country at the time the snow fell. Of the first lot placed on the ground the approximate cost would be at the rate of over 4s. This year's purchase of 1,800 cost a little more than the price of previous year. The previous year's hoggets are beginning to die rather badly, and the same remark will apply to the ewes still alive. Mr. Spain estimates the loss at not less than 40 per cent. Of course, the ordinary mortality with the class of sheep on the run would not be less than 10 per cent., probably a good deal more. Loss of sheep last year, about 25 per cent. Charles Bros.; part of Earnscleugh Run; 3,600 sheep: Ewes, 2,400; lambs and two-tooths, 1,200. Of above, 1,700 ewes were bought this season, principally from Morven Hills. Culls at 3s. and sales effected of the poorest of these and others bought, leaving altogether about 1,200 of the original flock. Mr. Charles appears to think that the young sheep will suffer as much as the old, as, unfortunately for him, they were on the low ground at the time the snow fell, and on this part the grass was practically eaten out, and the snow lying so long prevented them from getting a bite of anything. It was found impossible to drive them up the hill to the feed. They had, therefore, to remain standing in the snow without anything to eat. No feed was grown for winter supply or emergency. The number of lambs last year was only 50 per cent. The percentage of loss was 17 per cent. Butler, lessee of Pastoral Run ; 7,000 acres; 2,800 sheep : The country occupied by Mr. Butler was covered to a depth of 16 in. on the lowest parts, and to a greater depth' on the high lands. As in other runs, the faces did not "bare" for upwards of four weeks. He was able to handfeed about 300 of the whole. Of these a certain portion died. No attempt was made to move the balance of the flock, as the low country, being bare of grass or tussock, was worse than the high lands, where sheep had a chance to get at a little scrub. The number and classes are as follows : 1,600 breeding-ewes and 1,000 hoggets and dry sheep (500 hoggets and 500 wethers and two-tooths). The hoggets will suffer more than the other sheep. The lessee anticipates a loss of not less than 20 per cent, (ordinary mortality, 7 per cent.). As in other cases, he expects a substantial loss of ewes and lambs at lambing-time. Galloway Station; R. Campbell and Sons; carrying-capacity, 25,000: The snow around the homestead on the lowest part of the run lay to the depth of 9 in. and on the back country about 24 in. The frontage of all this run is practically bare of tussock, so that even at the least depth all the country was completely covered. The flock consists of 11,600 ewes, 4,300 hoggets, and 9,100 dry sheep. The first of these were, fortunately, in the middle block, away from the bare front country, where there is still some tussock. When they became somewhat exhausted a portion of the flock and the weakest, about 3,000, were brought out to Little Valley Woolshed Block and the homestead frontage and fed with hay; the others had to weather it as best they could. The strong dry sheep were on the back blocks, and had the benefit of snow-grass tussock. The hoggets were on Little Valley and Mount Campbell Blocks, and had rather a bad time. The flock upon the whole fared as well as possible under the circumstances, and with the care of the weaker ewes the results may not prove so bad, although the manager anticipates a substantial loss. Mrs. Donnelly has 700 sheep, a -hundred of which have already died, besides an anticipated future loss. No doubt a certain number of these would be on freehold, the balance on leasehold. J. Pitches holds among the family acreSj with a carrying-capacity of 2,000 mixed sexes and ages. He anticipated a great mortality, as he was unable to look near them for upwards
29
L—sc
of four weeks. To his surprise, when first seen it was found that the greater part of them had taken shelter among the rocks, and although absolutely starving they had managed (or the bulk of them) to survive. His loss, therefore, he thinks, will not be more than, say, 300. J. Noone, Small Grazing-run 244; 1,701 acres; 850 sheep: With the freehold and the feed grown on it Mr. Noone was in a position to bring his sheep to the turnips and hay, so that the loss suffered will not be more than forty or fifty, and of these half should be allotted to freehold. Miss Noone occupies the largest section of the Highfiold Block, 2,536 acres. Had 850 — 750 ewes and 100 hoggets. So far about forty dead, and a good many weak and dying. F. D. Bell; Ida Valley Station; 20,500 sheep: Ewes, 7,000; hoggets, 4,500; dry sheep, 9,000. 18 in. of snow The greatest loss has been among the hoggets, and of these it only amounts to a small percentage. All the ewes appear to be practically right. Wethers seem also to be right, with the exception of 2,000 which have not yet been seen. There were about 3,000 sheep hand-fed, for which all the hay on the station was required, and nearly ,£5O was expended in the purchase of more. Estimated loss, 5 per cent. T. Spain, the holder of a large block under lease in perpetuity (say, 2,000 acres), is the owner of 1,500 sheep of various classes and ages. As in other parts, the snow fell to a depth of from 18 in to 20 in. Shortly after the snowfall Mr. Spain commenced to feed with hay, which he fortunately had stored for such an emergency. Up to the present he has continued to supply the stock with hay. Even under these circumstances he estimates his loss at 300. The death-rate be attributes to the dry feed without turnips or even water to counteract this, and also to the ewes being near lambing. J. Davidson; 1,300 acres; 320 merino ewes : These were purchased last year from the Hawkdun (lock—i.e., the culls at 4s. 6d. He has skinned up to the present forty, and may lose a few more. J. Lobb; 270 ewes, of which thirty-eight have already died: Anticipates a further loss of, say, another thirty —besides these, lambs. T. Stephens and Mrs. Stephens; number of sheep grazed, 400: Seventeen have already been skinned, and to keep wethers alive it has been found necessary to use about 11 tons of oaten sheaves, and as only 1 ton is left, it will be necessary to buy horse-feed. A reduction in rent is asked. W. J. McCready; 6,000 sheep; Pastoral License No. : Freehold, 2,000 acres. The bulk of these sheep or all the ewes (3,000) were on freehold and had to be fed all this time. The dry sheep were all on the lower faces of the run and had to find feed on best points among the snow. Mr. McCready, immediately after the snowfall, went among the flock and relieved them as miioti as possible. Eight days after the snow fell a breeze bared some of the northern faces, and this enabled Mr. McCready and his men to bring in as many as they could find on to the bare country and thus save them from starvation. His loss will be considerable, but the number he is unable to estimate. (t. Hille; Runs 3 and 4, Kurow; small grazing-run, 9,400 acres: Mr. Hilie occupies the old Kurow Station homestead, with 160 acres of the original pastoral run. Apart from this the carrying-capacity of the run is from 1,800 to 2,000 at present, and at the time the snow fell Mr. Hille had only 1,300 sheep. Of these about 600 are breeding-ewes and 700 wethers. All were up on the high country at the time the snow fell, and had to remain where they were snowed ; n until the wind cleared some of the faces about eight days afterwards. They were then snowraked on to the bare faces. Mr. Hille is still unable to make an estimate. He thinks, however, that 10 per cent, will at present cover his loss. At the same time he guards himself by saying that there may be a good many smothered in the drifts. William McAughtrie; temporary grazing-right; 6,400 acres: The carrying-capacity is about 2,000. The number now grazing is 900. Of these there are 417 ewes, 300 wethers, and, say, 200 lambs. Of the above a few of the old ewes have died. Hoggets have suffered slightly, and a few more of these will die as they appeared to have eaten some of each other's wool. The wethers will not suffer greatly judging from those so far found, as they have come in strong and in good condition. The fact of the country being understocked greatly helped the limited number grazing on it, all being in first-class condition. D. Matheson ; Run 243; 12,168 acres and small grazing-run: The number of sheep now depasturing on the run is 8,000 —ewes 5,600, balance principally hoggets. The greater part of the former were kept well down on the sunny faces, and where the snow fell were fortunately on the lowest part of the run. In about six days these faces were cleared on the lower portions, and sheep were able to get a " picking "of grass and scrub. About a thousand ewes were in a block which held the snow much longer, and of this lot Mr. Matheson anticipates a considerable shortage. Up to the present 210 of these have been skinned and 169 of the other ewes. Of the 2,400 hoggets and young wethers, although on the higher part of the run, they have escaped very well, and, so far, only about a hundred have been found dead. The above shows the actual mortality to date, but Mr. Matheson anticipates a considerable loss between this and shearing, partly through weakness and also by the discovery of dead sheep among the drifts. • Omarama Station; Lady Young and Dalgety, pastoral licensees: Carrying-capacity approximately 40,000 sheep, made up as follows : 16,000 ewes, 17,000 wethers, and 7,000 hoggets, &c. So far as the country already seen is concerned, the loss does not seem to be so great as at first anticipated. The greater part of this flock happened to be well down from the actual mountain-tops, although, equally fortunately, not on the lower flats —that is, the middle levels or faces below a certain altitude either did not have such a heavy snowfall or more quickly showed some " black faces," and this, along with the fact that there was a little snow-grass tussock, enabled the sheep to weather it until the thaw came. As in many other cases which have come under our notice, the hoggets suffered most, while the ewes came out of the trouble somewhat better than the others. A great deal of feed grown on the station for some years back was cut into chaff and served out to the horses and rams (340); 350 cattle were also fed with oat and grass hay. The approximate loss will Le not more than 7,000.
L—sc
30
Benmore: This run embraces three separate leases —No. 1, University endowment, 96,000 acres, of a carrying-capacity of 32,000. No. 2, Canterbury District, 83,000 acres, carrying 8,000. No. 3, Otago District, 133,880 acres, carrying 32,000. Although the rent paid for the University endowment is £3,000, the carrying-capacity of the run in this district is equal to that of the endowment. The endowment block is depastured by breeding-ewes and young ewes. The hoggets were running on the Diadem Range and have suffered most. A small lot of the weakest hoggets, about 2,000, have all died, and of the balance of 9,000 half are expected to be dead. The balance of wethers and dry sheep, 21,000, have fared better than either ewes or hoggets, but even with them it is hard to make an estimate, as the dead are lying in lots ranging from one to twenty, and these are scattered all over the country, making it very difficult to arrive at the death-rate, and, apart from this, they appear to be dying now daily, partly from wool-eating and weakness. Taking (lie flock as a whole, the loss will total about 20,000 — i.e., say, 8,000 on Otago Crown lands. Aviemore Station; Mr. Cameron, lessee; Runs 243 a and 243b; 49,610 acres: The carryingcapacity of this run is 14,200 sheep, consisting of 4,500 ewes, 3,000 hoggets, and 6,700 wethers and dry sheep. The ewes were running on the Parson's Creek, Otamatata Block, and were, of course, on the most accessible country. They have, however, suffered on account of the wind at the time the snow fell having driven them into the shady sides of the gullies, and these perished through cold and want of food. The shortage among the ewes, Mr. Cameron thinks, will be more than the average loss of the flock. Hoggets on this run were running principally on the back or wether country, and appeared to have weathered it better than the other sheep. Wethers were on the Forks country, and had to remain where the snow found them for about four weeks, when the bulk of them got out to the sunny faces, and the consequent loss was not so great as that among the others. Taking the loss upon the whole, Mr. Cameron does not think it will average more than three or four thousand, or, say, 25 per cent. No sheep were hand-fed, as they could not be reached to get them out. B. Munro; run, Ahuriri Islands: Number of sheep on above, 430; number of cattle, 40. Three hundred sheep had to be brought down to Otamata and fed with hay and turnips. The remainder could not be found at the time. Cattle were taken up to Omarama and there fed with the oaten stack and paid for afterwards. W. Munro; small grazing-run: Eight hundred hoggets. Of these, so far, one hundred skinned, and a loss of another hundred anticipated.
Sir,— Alexandra, 26th August, 1903. We, the undersigned Crown tenants occupying adjoining Crown lands on the Old Man Range, Cairnhill, and Leaning Rock Survey District, Otago, respectfully beg to submit to you the unfortunate position in which we are placed by reason of the unprecedented severity of the winter and snowfall in central Otago. The loss among our sheep will be disastrous; we are not yet in a position to say exactly what it will be, but have every reason to fear it will be more than 50 per cent. Owing to our distance from the railway and the entire stoppage of traffic, we were unable to take any advantage of the Government's offer of free railage of stock and fodder. We are now faced with this position : We are unable to pay our half-year's rent, due in six weeks, and pray that enforcement of payment thereof be suspended pending application to the Land Board under "The Crown Tenants' Rent Rebate Act, 1900," for relief. And we further respectfully request that in view of our disastrous losses, which will cripple us for years and render us unable to pay our present rents, you will introduce a measure on the lines of " The Pastoral Tenants' Relief, Act, 1895," to enable us to apply for reduction in our annual rent. We would point out that the past winter has been the most disastrous ever experienced here, and that our position is entirely due to this cause. Our lands are on a very high level, and were in the very heart of the storm, and the snow is still lying on them to a considerable depth. Unless we are afforded the relief asked for our positions will be ruinous, and we shall not be able to hold our lands. Our holdings are very poor country, and the previous tenants had to surrender them on account of the heavy losses incurred. . We would respectfully ask that, in view of the premises, we be afforded relief as above. For a precedent we would refer you to the relief afforded Crown tenants in 1895, which year is not to be compared with the present 3 r ear for severity and consequent losses of stock. We are, &c, John Butler, Bald Hill Flat. Stephen T. Spain, Earnscleugh, Clyde. Charles Bros., The Hon. the Minister of Lands. Earnscleugh, Alexandra.
Department of Lands and Survey, Christchurch, 14th September, 1903. In further reply re estimate of losses of sheep in north Canterbury consequent upon the severity of the present winter : It has been impossible to obtain in so short a time details sufficiently reliable to be published; and only a very rough calculation can at present be made, as almost everybody objects to give any estimate until mustering and shearing time come. The extreme back country has suffered but little more than during ordinary winters; but the middle country runs, extending from the Rakaia to the Clarence Rivers, have suffered, and in some cases where southerly faces predominate, as on the Oxford, Te Koa, and other runs, the suffering has been great. The
31
I.—sc,
mortality has, of course, been greatest where old sheep have been kept, as in the cases of the Mount Oxford Runs, where very probably a thousand out of three thousand sheep will have perished. Great subsequent loss during lambing and shearing must result from the weakened condition of sheep unless an exceptionally mild spring occurs; but, as regards present amount of loss upon the pastoral leaseholds held from the Crown in Canterbury from the Rakaia northwards, I consider that it may be estimated at about thirty thousand sheep. F. Waed, The Commissioner of Crown Lands, Christchurch. Crown Lands Ranger.
Report on Snowfall in Canterbury. Department of Lands and Survey, District Office, Christchurch, 17th September, 1903. The heavy fall that occurred on the 1 lth July last was general throughout the district, but the injure caused by it was limited to particular localities, and even then some parts were much more seriously affected than others. It is universally considered to be the worst fall since 1895, or even heavier in parts than the latter, and that had it occurred earlier in the winter, its effects would have been more disastrous. It was immediately followed by a succession of heavy frosts for several weeks, which intensified the trouble. In south Canterbury, at a distance from the coast, the real thaw did not occur until the 13th August, nearly five weeks after the fall. For weeks after that, large tracts of plain many miles in extent were covered with a mantle of frozen snow, though the northern faces of the hills had cleared very considerably. Under such a condition of things, it is not surprising that the mortality among the sheep has been so great. Things were beginning to right themselves when, to aggravate the position, at the end of August another fall 'ook place. It, however, chiefly affected north Canterbury, and was accountable for most of the mortality there. In compliance with your instructions, I, in compauy with two members of the Land Board (Messrs. Pringle and Scaly), visited the parts most seriously affected, which was in the southern portion of the district. We inspected the settlements at Chamberlain, Albury, Punaroa, and Ashwick Flat, and the runs from Clayton near the head of the Orari River, through the Mackenzie County to Rhoborough Downs and Ben Ohau, then on by way of Benmore and Omarama to Kurow, and from there to the runs in the Upper Waitaki and Hakataramea. The thaw referred to occurred immediately after we had started on our tour, and though it delayed us a day on account of the floods, the removal of much of the snow greatly facilitated our inspection of the country. Speaking of the district as a whole, the most of the snow was along what might be termed the middle country, from the Waitaki to the northern end, more particularly so in north Canterbury, though it was by no means regular; adjacent runs were very often affected in a different degree. The heaviest fall seemed to cover a strip of country, twenty to thirty miles wide, from Waitaki, above Hakataramea, to Rangitatu, and a smaller streak taking in the Ben Ohau, Rhoborough Downs, Simon's Pass, Wolds, and Balmoral Runs. The fall in this part of the country was irregular, var3'ing from 2 ft. in parts to 3 ft 6 in. around Fairlie, where it was deepest. The July storm was not so severe in north Canterbury, and the mortality would have been but little above the average winter loss had it not been for the fall at the latter end of August, which swept off many thousands of sheep weakened by the previous one. From reports sent you from time to time of the result of the investigations and inquiries by the Crown lands rangers, you will have seen that the loss of the settlers in the various settlements affected, even in the worst parts, is not, I am glad to say, nearly the percentage of the runholders. The reason is largely due to the limited areas held, the small flocks they have to handle, and the facilities for feeding the stock. A few of those in the settlements I have mentioned have lost heavily, but these are chiefly holders of small grazing-runs. The eventual losses on the bulk of the pastoral runs within the country affected are expected to run from 15 to 60 per cent., in one case as much as 75 per cent. The known losses are very great; but, until after shearing, no definite information can be got as to what will be the acUial total loss, and much depends on what happens between now and then. Most of the sheep now on the runs affected are very weak through what they have undergone, and doubtless numbers will succumb before shearing, especially in the case of the ewes at lambing-time. In my travels lately in the affected districts, I learned that this mortality is now going on ; but in many instances things have turned out better than was at first anticipated, though in some not so well. Taking into account what we have seen for ourselves, together with the opinions of the Crown lands rangers, the information obtained from and opinions of the runholders or their managers, and other persons affected, we judge that the losses due to the two heavy falls of snow in July and August will be about 100,000 sheep in South Canterbury, and 30,000 in North Canterbury: together, say, 130,000 sheep. Thos. T. Humphries, The Surveyor-General, Wellington Commissioner of Crown Lands.
Losses by Snowfall, Southland. Department of Lands and Survey, District Office, Invercargill, 21st September, 1903. In reply to your memorandum of the 4th August, re the above subject, T have now to report, as follows : — From inquiries made from reliable sources I find there has been no loss of stock to speak of in this land district from the fall of snow which commenced on the 10th July last. There was no
I.—sc
32
particular locality, as far as I could ascertain, in which the fall of snow was very heavy; but, on the contrary, the fall appeared to be a fairly even one all over this district, and it was very little heavier on the high ground than on the low, and it appears that there were no drifts, even on the high ground. In the Waikaia Valley on the low ground the fall was about 12 in. deep, and not much more on the surrounding mountains. Round the Waimea Plains and on the Dome the fall was similar to the aforementioned. In the Eyre District towards Garston and in the Kingston District the fall was from 1 ft. to 18 in. In Wairio, Wairaki, and Takitimo Districts the fall was from 8 in. on the lower ground to about 18 in. deep on the higher ground, and towards Te Anau Lake, in the Te Anau, Mararoa, and Burwood Districts, &c, the fall was fairly even, about 15 in. to 18 in. deep, and it remained generally throughout the whole land district for a considerable time owing to the frost setting in, but it had totally disappeared within a month. No loss or unusual death-rate is anticipated, although the stock was set back a little owing to the cold; but in no respect was the severity anything like the cold snap experienced in September and October last year. Your memorandum did not direct me to go over the district with the members of the Land Hoard, and before I could conveniently get up country I had to wait upon you at Edendale and Core in connection with land-purchase business. You then told me I might ask two members to accompany me up country, but as the snow was pretty well away by that time I thought it inadvisable to ask them to accompany me at that late period. I therefore went myself, and the above is Ihe result of my personal inspection, supplemented by reliable information I had previously collected. I regret being so late in forwarding this report; it should have reached you about the beginning of this month had I not been laid up with an attack of lumbago. John Hat, The Surveyor-General, Wellington. Commissioner of Crown Lands.
Approximate Coat of Paper. —Preparation, not given ; printing (1,425 copiest, £18 13s.
Authority : John Mackay. Government Printer, Wellington.- 1904.
Price 9d.}
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/parliamentary/AJHR1904-I.2.3.3.14
Bibliographic details
LANDS COMMITTEE: (REPORT OF) ON THE PETITION OF G. G. DALGETY AND 22 OTHERS; TOGETHER WITH MINUTES OF EVIDENCE AND APPENDIX. (Mr. HOGG, Chairman.), Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1904 Session I, I-05c
Word Count
34,739LANDS COMMITTEE: (REPORT OF) ON THE PETITION OF G. G. DALGETY AND 22 OTHERS; TOGETHER WITH MINUTES OF EVIDENCE AND APPENDIX. (Mr. HOGG, Chairman.) Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1904 Session I, I-05c
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.