The Press Friday, June 11, 1920. The Wheat Problem.

Press, Volume LVI, Issue 16858, 11 June 1920, Page 6

The Press Friday, June 11, 1920. The Wheat Problem.

We do not know what the wheat- • r • growers of this country are thinking of the news of a very serious worldshortage, but the public will hope that they will share the optimism of Mr D. Jones, who told the Farmers' Union Conference yesterday that the prospect in front of the New Zealand grower is the brightest in our history. If the re- ■ ports of a general shortage lead to much more extensive sowings than were mado last year, 30 much the better it will be for the consumer. The situation in Britain is exceedingly difficult, and • the Government has decided that it is necessary to make extraordinary efforts' to increase the supply of home-grown corn. To this end an Agricultural Bill of unusual scope has been introduced, of which the keynote, Sir A. G. Boscawen says, is security—"all-round "security for the farmer by means <f "guaranteed prices, security to tho " labourer by means of, a minimum "wage, and security to the State by " giving it a certain control of culti"vation." It would undoubtedly be cheaper during the shortage, he Baid, to grow wheat than to import it, and this certainly appears to bo true, when tho American wheat crop is down 34 per cent, and the only sources of supply for Britain would appear to be Argentina and Canada, with a prospect of five dollars a bushel for Canadian wheat, despite an excellent harvest. It is evident that Britain is thoroughly alarmed, and that tho Government will be well supported in its determination not to let agriculture slip back to the old pre-war conditions. After tho disastrous harvests of the "seventies," stockfarming began to supplant corn-growing in England, and for a good many reasons this system of farm management was maintained until the outbreak of the war. It was a system, as Sir Thomas Middleton has pointed out, " well adapted for a rich country ready "to pay for all the beef and mutton " that could be produced, well adapted, " too, for a nation that took cheapness, " not certainty of supply, as the gauge " of a satisfactory food policy, and that " regarded the soil as raw material for " the crcation of wealth, not as a store- " house from which ample stocks of " food might be provided." This way of staling the 'position lays bare the main points upon which a change of view is enforced upon Britain by the circumstances that began to develop in 1914. In an address to the Agricultural Society in December last, Sir Thomas Middleton made a statistical analysis of farm-production, and he showed that the neglect of the plough was very uneconomical. Before the war he calculated that the ploughed land of the country fed 84 persons per 100 acres and the grass land about 20 persons. In the period 1801-10 the soil of the kingdom fed about IGJ million people, and in the period 1831-40 about 24J millions. In i he period 1909-13, according to this expert's calculations, only 17i millions were being so supported. The British people, he said, "entered " on tho world war with a supply " of home-grown food that would last " them from about 6 p.m. on Friday " until 10 a.m. on Monday in each' " week. Nor is there, it may be re- " marked, any substantial change to"day; we are more or less cheerfully, " according to our dispositions and our " knowledge, or want of knowledge,! "facing a world situation which,,in the '' matter of food production, no one can ** forecast, with a week-end supply as-' "eureS from our own land." During the war there was a gr«at revival of j.

tillage. Of every ICO acres of cultivated land -14 acres were under crops other than grass and fodders in the 'seventies. This area fell to 311- acres leiore the war, but in 191S recovered to 38 acres. The wheat yield in 1918 was 2339 thousand tons, which was ol per rent, more than in the average pr&-\var year, and then; were very substantial increases in the yield of oats, rye, and potatoes. Sir Thomas Middlemen examines the question whether Britain could grow all the bread-stuffs the requires without reducing her production of milk, beef, and mutton. He concludes that it is physically impossible. We need not summarise his arguments, but it is worth while noting the figures : which show the huge gnp between Bri- j tain's needs and her production. Before the war the average production was j 1393 thousand tons, and the importa-J tions -jSQ.j thousand tens. Mailing allowance for tho wheat equivalent of one-eighth of the maize imported, it is estimated that to become self-support-ing Britain would have to produce 6774 thousand tins moro wheat (in addition to vast additional quantities of oats, barley, and rye). Before the war the average acreage in wheat was ISS7 th'usand acres; a self-supporting Britain would need to put down 7414 thousand acres. The area under all cereals was 7334 thousand acres before the war; to bo independent of imports this area would require to be increased to 21,561 thousand acres. The magnitude of the gap between these figures, considered in conjunction with a world-shortage which can bo relieved only by tho release of the Russian stores, assuming that those stores are as groat as has boon stated, makes easily intelligible the growing anxiety of people in tho United' Kingdom.