THe chronicle. PUBLISHED DAILY LEVIN. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 1913. WEED PREVENTION.

Horowhenua Chronicle, 18 June 1913, Page 2

THe chronicle. PUBLISHED DAI LY LEVIN. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 1913. WEED PREVENTION.

.Dr. Cockayne, whoso investigations and advice concerning the sand drift nuisance along this coast proved of great, interest and help to settlers in this district, lately has 'been giving his attention to the weed prevention oroblem. The statement is frequently made (he writes) that the expense necessary to eradicate weeds is often so great that it is impracticable to carry out any effective work. This statement is nearly always made in the case of the control of weeds on permanent pasture, where, the great factor in weed eradication, good cultivation, cannot be taken advantage of. The problem of the control of weeds on such land is therefore ono of considerable importance. Any expenditure, no matter how great, provided it returns a good interest on the money spent, cannot be looked upon in any way as a monetary loss to the farmer. Unfortunately, too many farmers destroy weeds merely to keep with the Act rather than as a necessary procedure, in the economy of the farm. Tlie work should never

bo regarded as a necessary evil, 1:

as an investment capable of giving an absolutely certain return, often of very much greater valuo than the time and money spent upon- it, nt the same time giving a permanent ami truly increased value to the property hy reason of the Letter canying and selling capacity. It may ho well to indicate, how much can lie actually spent with" certainty of profit. On land worth £1 an acre containing 10 per cent, of useless plants, an expenditure of over 2s an aero -will he fully compensated ;i these useless plants are suppressed and their place taken hy utility plants. Thus for every £1 value of grazing land containing 10 per ' cpiit. of weeds, 2s an acre can bo spent with certainty of a profitable investment; that containing 20 peV cent.. 5s can be expended; 30 per cent, 8s 6d; 40 per cent., 13s; 50 ppr cent, £1 ; 60 per cent.. £l 10sper cent., £2 6s; 80 per cent., £o: and 90 per cent., £10. Thus limd worth £38 per acre containing 20 por cent. oP weeds can havo £9 10s spent on It for weed suppression, and then show a direct profit, to say nothing of the permanent gain. From the above it can be seen that the control of weeds on high-class land will always he profitable, hut their control on very cheap land will depend upon the percentage of ground occupied by them. AVhere this is largo, weed-control, even if,the land be very cheap, is probably payable. Tims, for example, land worth £2 an aero containing 60 per cent, of tauhimi can have £3 per acre spent with profit in controlling this weed. These remarks refer very largely to those useless plants the presence of which is nearly always condoned by the farmer on the plea that it will not pay to deal with them. Of course, with regard to extremely noxious and aggressive weeds, the amount that can. be spent depends entirely on the loss in the value of the land that would occur were the weeds left in possession