FERTILISER RATIONING

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 4, Issue 168, 15 October 1941, Page 4

FERTILISER RATIONING

Sir, —I wish to reply to your correspondent "Demos" in which |ie suggests that farmers owning second or third class land should apply to their local fertiliser committee for further supplies of fertiliser. It may interest him to know that their advice was acted upon some .three months ago, by a large number of farmers with negative results. It is quite evident that your correspondent is not conversant witli-lhe regulations governing the locar gommittee in their decisions, one of which reads that a farmer in possession of second or third class land is not entitled to any special consideration in this respect. In, fact it is difficult to see how any local committee could, under the restrictive nature of the regulations allocate additional supplies of fertiliser to the 40 per cent already allotted to farmers in the majority of cases. Possibly your correspondent may have some inside information on the subject of fertiliser rationing, and if so I invite him to disclose it for the benefit of the farming community. It is comforting to note that in the concluding part of his-letter he assures me that the shortage of fertiliser will not be prolonged any longer than is essentially necessary. (Whatever this may mean). Here again your correspondent may be in possession of some information denied to the average man on the land who would be very pleased to know what is meant in this respect.

I may add it is not my custom usually to reply to anonymous letter writers but on this occasion some of the facts contained in your correspondent's letter are somewhat misleading, insofar, that the general public may be led to believe that all a farmer has to do in order to procure further supplies of fertiliser, is to apply to the local fertiliseu committee. This is not entirely cor* rect, as a farmer is only entitled, under the regulations to* 40 per cent of the average of his purchases during years ending 31st May last. This I contend is a most unjust method of rationing.

Another factor which prompted me to reply was the fact that your correspondent claims to be a member of a fertiliser manufacturing company, and should therefore be well versed in his subject. Yours etc., J. L. BURNETT. P.O. Box 8, Waimana. 13th October, 1941.