PRODUCTION OF SUGAR BEET

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22507, 15 September 1938, Page 15

PRODUCTION OF SUGAR BEET

“SATISFACTORY CROPS POSSIBLE” DEPARTMENTAL REPORT ON EXPERIMENTS [THE PRESS Special Service.] WELLINGTON. September 13. During the last season the Fields Division of the Department of Agriculture for the Bureau of Industries has 3.30 p.m., Walnoni B v. Whkcombes (Mr J. TimbreU), court 4; 3.15 p.m.. Latex v. Hollanders (Mr S. J. A’Court), court 12. Section 5: 2 p.m.. North Linwood v. Moeraki B (Mr T. Paterson), court 3; 2 p.m.. Technical F v. Cathedral (Mrs W. Newsome), court 2; 2.30 p.m., Y.W.C.A. C v. Mairehau B (Miss I. Weston), court 1; 3 p.m.. Cathedral v. Moeraki B (Mrs W. Newsome), court 2; 3.30 p.m.. North Linwod v. Y.W.C.A. B (Mr T, Paterson), court 3.

Fifth Grade—Section 2: 2 p.m., Riccarton Rechabltes A v. Marshland B (Mrs L. Harris), court 8: 2 p.m.. Buntings A v. Pacific A (Mr N. Hill), court 9; 2.45, Marshland B v. Pacific A (Mr N. Hill), court 9; 2.45, Hiccarton Rechabltes A v. AB.C. B (Mrs L, Harris), court 8; 3.15, Marshland B v. Buntings A (Mr N. Hill), court 9; 3.15, Rlccarton Rechabltes A v. Pacific A (Mrs L. Harris), court 8. Section 3: 2 p.m„ Staretta v. Tudor Hosiery (Mr J. Tlmbrell), court 4; Technical H v. Monarch Major (Mrs A. L. Gumming), court 5; 2.45 p.m., McKenzies v. Tudor Hosiery (Mr J. Tlmbr.ell), court 4; Monarch Major v. Staretta (Mrs A. L. Gumming), court 5; 2 p.m„ S.L.C.C. v. McKenzies (Mrs S. R. Harris), court 6; 2.45 p.m., Technical H v. SX.C.C. (Mrs S. R. Harris), court 6; 3.30 p.m., Staretta v. Technical H (Mrs A. L. Gumming), court 5; 3.30 p.m.. Monarch Major v. Tudor Hosiery (Mr J. Timbrell), court 4; 3.30 p.m., McKenzies v. Oddfellows A (Mr S. Tredennlck), court 7. Section 4: 2 p.m., Arraness v. Gadsdens (Mr A. L. Cutpmlng), court 13; Philipson A v. Radley (Kirs Dolheguy), court 30; 2,45 p.m., Arraness v. Ballantynes B (Mr A. L. Gumming), court 13; Radley v. Star (Mrs Dolheguy), court 10; Phlllpsott A v. Gadsdens (Mrs Dolheguy), court 10; 3.30. p.m., Philipson A v. Moeraki C (Mr A. L. Gumming), court 13. Sixth Grade—Semi-final: 2,30 p.m., winners action 1 (Deanes) v. winners section 2 (Hlnemoa B) (Mr S. J. A’Court), court 12. Section 1: 2 p.m., Parisian A v. North Beach B (Mrs D. Weir), court 11; 2.45 p.m.. Parisian A v. Columbia (Mrs D. Weir), court 11; 3.15 p.m., Parisian A v. Hagley C (Mrs D. Weir), court 11. Section 3: 2 p.m.. Challengers v. Zealandia (Mr S. J. A’Court), court 12; 2 p.m.. Pitman’s College v. Kalapol C (Mr S. Tredennlck), court 7; 2.45 p.m.. Pitman’s College v. Challengers (Mr S. Tredennlck), court 7: 3.30 p.m., Challengers v. Gadsdens B (Miss I. Weston), court 1.

carried out further investigations into the possibilities of growing sugar back in New Zealand. Trials were centred mainly in Canterbury, although two plots were sown at Napier and one at Balclutha. Unfortunately the weather was not particularly favourable. An excessively dry spring in the southern districts was detrimental to good germination and the wet tomer prevented the crops from ripening properly. This meant that in acme of the trials the percentage of sugar was not particularly high. During the early part of the harvesting season the two Hawke’s Bay experiments suffered severely from floods and for that reason one had to be abandoned. Discussing the results, Mr J. w. Woodcock, crop experimentalist m the Department of Agriculture, said that on the whole, in spite of the unfavour - able weather, the yields had been very satisfactory. That was particularly so in one crop at Leeston and one dip at Balclutha. The latter district was noted for its high yields of root ewpa. At both those centres the yields had been in the vicinity of 30 tons to toe acre. Three crops in South Canterbury had yielded about 25 tons to the acre although the wet summer, which was Quite abnormal for the district, had not been conducive to high yields or early ripening. Results of Second Year "The second year’s experience in growing sugar beet under field conditions,” said Mr Woodcock, "strengthens the view that satisfactory crops could be grown in New Zealand if an industry were established. Any proposal to set up such industry, however, would require careful investigation from the manufacturing side. All that these experiments have set out to do is to make sure that our land and climate can pioduce the raw material. It is probable that a further season’s evidence will be procured on this question.”

Mr Woodcock said that the last available figures from Great Britain showed that in 1930 there were 350,000 acres under cultivation in sugar beet, the average yield being approximately nine tons to the acre. The smallness of the yield was accounted for by the fact that the high subsidy paid by the British Government had induced many farmers to grow sugar beet on unsuitable land. In the Netherlands the average yield was approximately 13 tons to the acre, and. in his opinion, that would form a more reliable basis of comparison. The average yield from the first season’s experiments in New Zealand had been 17.3 tons to the acre, and this year approximately 22 tons to the acre. . In making a comparison with the English figures, however. It bad to be remembered that the New Zealand crops had been grown in selected localities and the English figures included trials \yhich bad failed altogether or been abandoned, whereas the New Zealand average applied to completed experiments only.