The Department of Agriculture and pasture improvement, 1892–1914

Abstract

Even before 1900, the emphasis in New Zealand agriculture shifted from extensive agriculture to more intensive use of existing farmland through pasture improvement. Examination of the contribution of the Department of Agriculture, which together with the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research activated the later ‘grasslands revolution’, shows both the extent and the limits of its role in pasture improvement before 1914. It is suggested that until then, the prime agents in this transformation were not Department of Agriculture staff but rather enlightened farmers, with co‐operation between them on an equal footing towards the end of the period.

Grassland revolutions in New Zealand: Disaggregating a national story

“…The on‐farm impacts of farm intensification probably varied according to the kind of environment of the farm. The off‐farm effects of on‐farm intensification may at times have been positive – releasing other land from pastoral production – as well as negative (Le Heron 1989ab; Star & Brooking 2007). Some of the worst off‐farm impacts were localised around the industrial sites associated with pastoral farming.…”

“…The grassland revolution (Smallfield 1970, Levy 1970) is a national story. As Star and Brooking (2007, p. 193) summarise, Smallfield celebrated a ‘2.5‐fold increase in stock units’ from 1920 to 1966 while the sown area in grass rose by only 23%. This intensification of New Zealand pastoral agriculture was made possible by heavy application of fertilisers, re‐sowing with better quality grasses, improved livestock, purchases of farm machinery and, in some districts, application of irrigation.…”

“…The development of arable farming, the planting of fodder crops and the harvesting of grass for stored feed contributed to increases in livestock numbers. Star and Brooking (2007, p. 193) are aware that this is a matter of feed management. For them, ‘grass’ means ‘more properly forage plants, including those like clover that strictly speaking are not grass’.…”

“…It first reviews the grassland revolution from environmental history and political economy perspectives. It does not deny that there was a grassland revolution: national livestock numbers increased from 1921 to 1971, indicating an overall increase in the carrying capacity of the ‘New Zealand farm’, and average national carrying capacity rose from less than six livestock units per hectare in 1881 to 8.5 in 1911 (Star & Brooking 2007). Rather, I argue that the ‘grassland revolution’ is a particular compilation of indicators at the national scale, a matter that has implications for any attempt to reassess the revolution in economic or environmental terms.…”

“…As environmental historians reinterpret the grasslands revolution, the environmental impacts of historical grasslands development remain under-researched (but see Brooking et al 2002;Holland et al 2002;Isern 2002;Roche 2002;Wildblood-Crawford 2006) and for several reasons. It is partly because of the lack of suitable historical data on environmental impacts, and partly because of the absence of a political project to remedy historical environmental injustice or damage, but, significantly, also because of the scale at which the grassland revolution is pitched: this is a national story of nine decades of intensification of pastoral agriculture (Brooking et al 2002;Star & Brooking 2007). Governments tend to construct environmental impacts as matters of current or future management, not historical legacy (Ministry for the Environment 1995).…”