PURE SEEDS.
ADDRESS BY GOVERNMENT BIOLOGIST. THE FARMERS' SAMPLE DISCUSSED. Brief reference wns made in the report of tho proceedings of the Farmers' Union Conference last week to the address given by Mr. A. H. Cockayne, Government Biologist, on Hie question of pure, seeds. Opportunity is now taken to give fuller details of Hγ. Cockayne's remarks, which were based on the following remit from tho Pelorus .Sound:—"That this conference strongly advocates that, there be no further delay in bringing into force an Act preventing tho further spread of noxious weeds; but recognises the Pure Seeds Bill as at present drafted, though right in" principle, is wrong in application, and thiit no Bill will have the desired effect that does not provide that, the Agricultural Department shall cause to he inspected all lands that shall be harvested for seed, and a certificate given accoi'dingly as either clean or unclean, that a copy of such certificate be given with all vseed sold, and that all growers, of seed shall notify the Department of their intention to harvest" Tho idea of inspecting all land that was to be devoted to the production of seeds said Mr. Cockayne, quite out of the question, nor' could he see whnt actual value in lessening the spread of weeds such an inspection would have. Tho term seed not being defined, they would bo at a loss to know what crops would require to be inspected. If cereal crops were excluded, and they.dealt only with grasses, clovers, and certain special agricultural crops, the idea, of inspection would still bo a futile one, so far as the control of the spread'of weeds was concerned. The idea was evidently to certify that certain of the seed'areas in New Zealand were clean, and others unclean. The question of what constituted an unclean area was not specified, but presumably an area containing gazetted noxious weeds would bo reckoned .unclean. Thus land containing Californian thistle would be termed unclean. Suppose, for instance,, that a paddock containing Californian thistle wore used for the production of prairio grass seed, what would be the use'of certifying that the seed came from land containing thistle, when this weed was never found as an impurity in prairie grass, even'when it.was not particularly well dressed. Again, if cereals were to be included,, of what use' would it be to penalise seed oats from a Californian thistle region when properly machine-dressed seed oats could not contain' Californian thistle? Further, if all the land that contained the nine common weed impurities found in commercial seed was to be designated unclean, the vast majority of our cultivated land would come under.' such a category. Taking the majority of our grass and clover seed crops—and the area devoted to, these well exceeded 100,000. acres, rycgras3 last season occupying 70,000 acresit must be earefuly borne in mind that the New Zealand and European ; systems ot seed-harvesting were vastly dissimilar. In Europe seed was generally saved from areas specially sown and utilised for seed , production, while in New Zealand the majority of our grass seeds were harvested t'roni permanent pastures, and'm many cases mixed:pastures, where one species was more or. less prominent. Under these circumstances, it would be clearly; understood that European sowed seed was. much purer in 'the rough (before beingcleaned) than New Zealand seed. Tho extremely impure nature of much of our local seed in the rough had led to a system of seed-cleanin? that was unexcelled in any portion of the world. Thus they had the extremely'peculiar and interesting position of undressed,local seed being probably the-dirtiest in the world, while dressed seed on the same line was without doubt, unequalled in any seed-producing jountry, so for as frppdom from extraneous seeds was concerned. Alluding to Hawkc's Bay machine-dressed rye-grass— the finest and cleanest that was harvested vn.ywh.ere—Jlr. Cockayne stated that at times this seed in the rough had Contain>d quite 70 per cent, of impurities, while :lie dressed' samples yielded much less ;han one per cent., and could be termed ilmost absolutely pure. If the land on vhioh these samples had been grown had jeen inspected, it would presumably have »en termed unclean. ; He maintained that a Pure Seeds Bill ihould deal with the purity and germinaion of seed that was offered for rale for owing purposes. The mere presence of veeds in a field saved for seed was no crierion whatever that the dressed material rould contain them in any appreciable iunntiti.es,, From the'above, added Mr. Jockaync.'it would be seen that the use if farmers' samples (that in the nature of hem'could only be very imperfectly leaned) should be avoided, and the prolibition of.the use of any seed that, was lot pure or had not been thoroughly ma-hine-dressed would have a far more 'caching effect on the limiting of the pread of weeds than the inspection of the and on which the seed was grown. Exeptions would have to be taken, of ourse, to such grasses as Danthonia, finch could not be satisfactorily mahined. Field inspection became of great ■alue when dealing with different strains if certain- crops which were not distin;uishablo except when growjng, and unler such conditions field inspection' was of itar importance in determining trueness o type. So far as grasses and clovers rere concerned, there was no necessity for itch inspection in New Zealand, but cerainly the application of the idea might ead to great good in ihe caso of cereals nd peas, etc. In this case, however, the nspection would have bearing on quality ud truenoss to type, and not to the'ulti-. nate purity of the harvested seed, a natter which could only be determined iy the analysis of the seed itself. With no' weed, perhaps, field examination night be of value, and that was ragwort n timothy fields. Strange as it might ppear, ragwort seemed to be almost imlossible to clean out of timothy; thus a ertificate that ragwort was present in he land from which certain timothy was larvested would indicate pretty clearly hat this weed was present in the samiles. ' ,
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19120807.2.84.1
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1512, 7 August 1912, Page 10
Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,007PURE SEEDS. Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1512, 7 August 1912, Page 10
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Dominion. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.