FARM AND DAIRY.

Taranaki Daily News, 10 May 1921, Page 8

FARM AND DAIRY.

POSSIBILITIES IN CANTERBURY.

The virtues of lucerne as a farm crop were extolled at a public meeting held, at Christchurch recently, under the auspices of the Canterbury Lucerne Committee. It was decided to support the dommititee in approaching citizens to provide funds for lucerne growing competitions. A highly effective display confronted the audience in the Chamber of Commerce hall. In front of the dais, on the dais, and on the walls, prosperous looking bundles of lucerne hay, long lucerns roots, and arresting charts were given to exhibts of poor roots resisting from defective cultivation. One particularly interesting exhibit consisted of bundles of lucerne end on end, reaching from the dais almost to the roof. It had been grown at the School for the Deaf, Sumner, and represented the total height of the growths during the 1916 season. It had grown without manure or irrigation.

Mr. H. D. Acland, who presided, spoke of the need for greater production. The main thing was to know how to do it, he said. In Denmark lucerne had enormously increased the productivity of the country. “I am one who is not anxious to see the growth of large industrial centres in New Zealand,” said \Mr. Acland. ‘/What I have seen of that sort of civilisation in other parts of the world does not appeal to me at all. I believe lucerne would enable that to be eliminated to a large exjtent, and enable us to get a much larger population in the country districts.” ’Mrl A. Macpherson salid that few lands in Canterbury were unsuitable to the successful growth of lucerne. It was one of the most easily grown crops. He had never yet known lucerne to fail, although he had seen frequently cases of failure on the part of the farmer, as the result of faulty cultivation. In Taranaki many farmers had made great advancement with the aid of lucerne. They cared neither for drought nor storms—lucerne grew independent of them. It was desired to stir up Canterbury farmers to the possibilities of the plant. Experimental plots had been established in various parts of Canterbury, and some excellent results had been obtained. Lucerne had been grown on the Port Hills, with great success. The whole of the Port Hills could produce lucerne. At- NewBrighton it had produced a return of £32 15s 2d each acre. Lucerne grown in sand at the Bromley school last year had reached a height of 15ft, placing the growths of the crops during the year one on top of the other. The. roots of lucerne had been known to go as deep as 129 ft. The result of lucerne growing at the Paparua Prison farm, on very stony ground, was that land which in its orignal state was valued at £3 an acre, and had a carrying capacity of one sheep to each five acres, was enabled to carry 4.48 sheep an acre, or, to look at it another way, carried 22.40 in plaoe of one sheep, to five acres. If allowed to grow properly lucerne would strike deeper and deeper, and eventually draw nourishment from surface soil hardly at all. The big roots on exhibtion had been taken from a plot near shingle-pits by Lincoln Road. They had penetrated fifteen feet through the shingle. The plant was about ten years old. A great many farmers failed because they used fertiliser, as was shown by the exhibits of pool' growths, taken from Canterbury farms where fertiliser had been used. Lucerne would stand 60 degrees of frost without injury. The return If one plant was grown' to every square yard in an acre, and produced as much as .one of the exhibts of lucerne hay would fie £lB5 16s, for two crops off the 2U»re. On a farm taken over in North Canterbury by Mr. Heasley, a block .of twenty-three acres of lucerne had been continuously grazed by 500 sheep, or at the rate of twenty-two sheep to each acre. This number had been reduced to 265, or llj sheep to the acre, and the growth of lucerne was so strong that ft was beyond the power of the sheep to keep it down. Mr. G. T, Booth said that the soil was not the ail important factor in production that people were apt to think it. The main function "of the soil was to find foothold for plants. The main factor in production was the cultivation that was done. That was where a great deal of failure in farming lay. It might be much better to spend in the i cultivation of one acre what would' ordinarily be spent In cultivating two acres. That should be recognised by Canterbury people. Flocks and developed soil were not what they should be. There was no more serious problem than the increasing of New Zealand’s exports. That was the only way out of the present financial difficulty.

The land must be made to produce more, and that could only be done by better cultivation. He personally knew little about lucerne, but he had u,een a great many very successful crops. He suggested that the committee might ver}/- well link up wHh the Canterbury Progress League for the development of lucerne growing. Mr. A. W. Beaven also spoke of the capabilities of lucerne growing. Mr. J. Longton this meeting heartily supports the Lucerne Campaign Committee in approaching the citizens of Christchurch and surrounding districts to provide funds for lucerne growing competitions, with a view of developing the growing of this valuable plant over large areas of our provinee.” He mentioned that the committee intended instituting competitions throughout Canterbury. They would be confined to areas of about ten acres and over. Prize money would be offered to induce farmers to take a keen interest in the cultivation of the plant. By this means it was hoped to bring large areas into lucerne cultivation throughout Can/terbury. Mr. P. Trolove seconded the motion. He said that lucerne was probably one of the most .impjotftant eropts which would be grown in Canterbury in future. The motion was carried unanimously.