Is Agricultural Research In New Zealand Worth While to You?

New Zealand Journal of Agriculture, Volume 101, Issue 1, 15 July 1960, Page 2

Is Agricultural Research In New Zealand Worth While to You?

LJOPES and fears for agricultural research in New ■ ■ Zealand and suggestions on how to get all that can be expected from research were covered by Dr J. F. Filmer, Director of the Animal Research Division of the Department of Agriculture, in opening the 12th Ruakura Farmers' Conference Week at Hamilton last month. Appointed Director of the Division when it was formed in I 939, Dr Filmer is to retire later this year. His address, an adaptation of which follows, reflects his close association with and interest in developments in agricultural science and practice. DR FILMER ASKS FARMERS:

SEVEN years ago when I gave the opening address to the Ruakura Farmers’ Conference on the subject “Research and the Farmer” I asked and tried to answer two questions: 1. How can research help the farmer? - 2. What can the farmer do about research? I am going to speak to you on the same subject, but this time I will ask only one question and I will not try to answer it. I am going to ask New Zealand farmers to answer this question: Is agricultural research in New Zealand worth while to you? In his presidential address to the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1948, the late Sir Henry Tizard said: I shall predict that unless the prevention of diseases among plants and animals and all other scientific problems of the supply of food are studied on the same kind of scale by men of similar calibre as are the problems of human health, chaos and misery will result.

Sir Henry was referring to the necessity for agriculture to step up its

rate of production to meet the growing needs of a rapidly increasing world population. That problem is still with us and I believe that on a world scale we still have a long way to go to meet Sir Henry’s challenge.

I believe, too, that even from a selfish point of view, New Zealand cannot remain indifferent to the threat of misery and chaos which inevitably follow hunger. But I know that today New Zealand farmers are finding it rather difficult to obtain satisfactory prices for some of the things they produce. It is in this immediate and local situation rather than in the long-term worldwide sphere that I ask New Zealand farmers: Is agricultural research in New Zealand worth while to you? I have noted with interest the campaign by the dairy industry which was recently launched in the “Exporter” under the caption “lbs.-per-£”. Let us then look first at the cost of agricultural research. While I want you to think of all aspects of agricultural research, I will draw my data from animal research for the sole reason that I happen to be more familiar with it than with other aspects of agricultural research.

Since 1939, when it was formed, the Animal Research Division has spent a total of over £4 million. The expenditure in 1939-40 was £45,000. By 1959-60 this had risen to £450,000, and of that total £258,000 was spent at Ruakura. The whole of the money has been found by taxpayers of New Zealand

and about a quarter of the total came from the taxes paid by farmers. It can be calculated that in 1959-60 the farmers’ share of the cost worked out at about O.Old. for every pound of meat, wool, and butterfat they produced. But I do not give you that figure in an endeavour to belittle the expenditure; £450,000 per year is a lot of money and I often ask myself and sometimes ask my staff if New Zealand farmers are getting value for what we spend. ... In 1951 Dr W. M. Hamilton, now Secretary of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, calculated that there was in that year a net gain to New Zealand dairy farmers of: £600,000 from the use of penicillin in the treatment of mastitis;

£630,000 from the use of Strain 19 vaccine for the control of contagious abortion; and £135,000 from the topdressing of peat land with copper. Research Division's Contributions A few more contributions made by the Animal Research Division in the past 20 years are listed in the following section.

Research Contributions

METHODS have been evolved for producing from 250 to 350 lb of butterfat per acre on a self contained dairy farm in a district where the average production is about 210 lb. ARTIFICIAL breeding techniques were evolved which made it possible for 415,000 dairy cows to be inseminated this year from specially selected bulls. DEVICES have been evolved which have increased the efficiency of milking machines and a paper at this conference will report the significant effect of efficient machine milking on butterfat production.

METHODS of diagnosing and controlling cobalt deficiency have been devised. GOITRE in young lambs has been prevented by giving pregnant ewes one iodine drench three months after tupping. RICKETS in hoggets has been controlled by giving one dose of vitamin D concentrate at the beginning of winter. SELENIUM is promising to give spectacular results in preventing white muscle disease, one form of lamb ill thrift, and the low lambing percentage which sometimes accompanies these.

A SIMPLE method was evolved for preventing the post-dipping lameness which occurred when some of the modern insecticides were used in sheep dips. EFFECTIVE vaccines have been provided for the control of blood poisoning in sheep, epididymitis in rams, and leptospirosis in dairy cattle. npHE methods of rabbit poisoning have markedly improved. T AST year, veterinarians were assisted in the •L' diagnosis of over 14,000 cases of animal disease. I will not attempt to assess the total annual value of these contributions to the farmers of New Zealand beyond suggesting that it greatly exceeds the £450,000 which we are now spending annually on animal research.

Continuing Problems However, future expenditure should be based not on past achievements but on the anticipated returns from future work. Are there any unsolved problems whose solution would justify a continuation of the present rate of expenditure on animal research? That is a question which New Zealand farmers should surely seek to answer. Here are a few of the unsolved problems which are known to reduce the efficiency of animal production in New Zealand.

The low lambing percentage of Romney ewes. Abortion in cows and ewes due to Vibrio fetus and in ewes due to Toxoplasma. These cannot at present be controlled. The relatively low growth rate of fat lambs and beef cattle. Milk fever, grass staggers, and ryegrass staggers.

Foot diseases of sheep and pigs. Biting flies.

In addition to problems which are at present recognised, it is likely that further study will result in the recognition of other factors affecting, efficiency and it is certain that new problems will arise from further intensification of production. There seems little doubt that there will never be any lack of problems of great economic importance. But is it likely that over the next 20 years animal research will solve enough of them to justify an expenditure of £450,000 per year? I believe it is essential that farmers should study that question.

Efficiency of Production During recent years, New Zealand farmers have become increasingly aware that they can do little to control the prices they receive for the produce they export. Their prosperity therefore depends on keeping down the cost of production and it is natural that they should be concerned at the cost of the things they have to buy, the level of wages they have to pay, and the cost of handling their produce outside the farm. It is, however, very doubtful if anything they can do will materially reduce these costs. There is, however, one major factor in the cost of production which they can control. New Zealand farmers are probably the most efficient in the world and their efficiency is increasing. In his annual report for 1955 the Director-General of Agriculture presented a survey of 35 years’ progress in New Zealand agriculture. He

showed that during that time production per acre had increased by 160 per cent and production per unit of manpower by 180 per cent. He then said: “Thus we owe our ability to export an increasing volume of farm products to scientists, educationists, extension services, commercial interests, and, above all, to the remarkable capacity of the farming community to adapt goods, and services to the advancement of our primary industries.” There is plenty of evidence that efficiency of production can still be increased. The question I want New Zealand farmers to answer is: Can agricultural research make a worth while contribution to future increases in efficiency? Farmer Encouragement In 1953 I said: “What can the farmer do about research? He could, of course, do nothing. Even then research would go on because some of us believe that agricultural research is

the most valuable service that we can render not only to the farmer but to New Zealand.” Since then research activities had been expanded, . said Dr Filmer, and they had been well supported by the statutory boards, the Veterinary Services Council, and by many individual farmers. After discussing recent controversy about scientists’ salaries, Dr Filmer continued: The important question for New Zealand farmers to answer is not: Are agricultural scientists adequately rewarded? but Is agricultural research in New Zealand worth while to you? If the answer is yes, you will be fighting your own battle if you do what you can to see that agricultural research continues in an effective way. Calibre of Staff Important In the past you have been somewhat critical of the administration of agricultural research. . . . but there is something infinitely more important than administration. Perhaps I can get my point across with three quotations: The greatest of all research problems is the people who do the — “Punch” of 23 years ago. The fact is that all really new developments of industry are the product of the worfy of very few men — late Sir Henry Tizard. Let me therefore conclude by underlining the importance of good administration but by reminding you also that administration in science will not, of itself, produce a single new idea, and without new ideas science would cease to — Sir Ben Lockspeiser, a former Secretary of the British D.S.I.R. There you have it. Research is based on the original ideas of very few men. If these very few men can be encouraged to think and if arrangements can be made to test the ideas that arise from their thinking, you will get all that you can expect from research. The law of averages makes it unlikely that New Zealand will produce many of the new ideas on which future progress will be based. But to obtain full value from the money spent on research we must have men who are quick to appreciate the potential value of new ideas, wherever and whenever they, appear. And we must have men who have the enthusiasm, the ability, the training, and the tenacity required to test these new ideas and to evolve means of adapting them to the solution of local problems. The inability to attract and to retain an adequate number of these men is the major factor which limits agricultural research in New Zealand today.

Studying Disease at Wallaceville Dr LEON JACOBS, a world authority on toxoplasmosis, a parasitic disease of humans and animals, is studying, the disease in sheep at the Department of Agriculture’s Wallaceville Animal Research Station. The study of toxoplasmosis is of considerable importance to New Zealand, as toxoplasma (a micro-organism) is the greatest individual cause of abortion in ewes and of losses in new-born lambs in this country. Wallaceville is doing research on the disease and the results are encouraging, but it is considered important that further extensive experimental work be done as soon as possible.

Dr Jacobs has been working on toxoplasmosis for at least ten years and is regarded as a world authority on the disease. His studies have covered a wide field and his knowledge and experience will be of very great value to the New Zealanders who are working with him. Dr Jacobs is head of the Laboratory of Parasitic Diseases in the National Institutes of Health at Bethesda, Maryland. He has a Doctorate of Philosophy from George Washington University and has specialised in microbiology. During the war he was Malaria Control Officer for the United States Army in the South Atlantic theatre. In 1955 Dr Jacobs received the Washington Academy of Sciences’ Award for Scientific Achievement, the Barnett M. Cohen Award of the Maryland Branch of the Society of American Bacteriologists, and the Brooklyn College Alumnus Award. In 1954 he received the Arthur S. Flemming Award of the Washington Junior Chamber of Commerce as “one of ten outstanding young men in the Government Service”. Dr Jacobs was awarded a Fulbright Fellowship to enable him to study in New Zealand for eight months. His wife and three children have accompanied him.

Conference Papers

OTHER Ruakura Farmers' Conference papers will in accordance with the usual practice be published in succeeding issues of the "Journal".

All the addresses and a resume of discussions on them will be included in the "Proceedings of the Ruakura Farmers' Conference Week", copies of which are supplied to those paying conference fees. Orders from those unable to attend the conference will be accepted up to time of going to press in a month or so. They may be sent with the cost of copies ordered (lOs. per copy, post free) to the Publications Section, Department of Agriculture, Box 2298, Wellington, or the Ruakura Animal Research Station, Private Bag, H amilton.