Breaking in the land in the 19th century set the stage for modern farming. Photo / Paul Taylor
Kem Ormond takes a look at the world of farming back in the day.
In 19th-century New Zealand, land was increasingly cleared, cultivated, and developed for farming.
Māori had been cultivating land for centuries before European arrival, growing kūmara and other crops.
By the mid-1800s, Māori agriculture had expanded significantly, with large-scale operations and commercial trade.
European farming introduced large-scale land “breaking in,” involving bush clearing, swamp draining, and conversion of native grasslands into pasture.
It was slow work, often involving fires, bullocks, and axes.
The Vogel Era (1870s) marked a turning point, with major infrastructure investment, with roads and railways making rural land more accessible.
The pace then accelerated with technological advances and growing markets for agricultural products.
This included advances in fertiliser (especially superphosphate), mechanisation and eventually refrigeration.
New Zealand Herald, January 21, 1927
“Opus” writes:—Just before the war I purchased, at £11 an acre, 15 acres of gum land midway between Birkenhead and Albany.
With the exception of four acres of bush, the land was covered with fern, ti-tree, gorse, and blackberries.
At the time I was 67 years of age, and so had to employ most of the labour in breaking in the land, and soon had 11 acres in grass, and divided into paddocks, and ring-fenced.
I erected a cottage on this homestead, which I occasionally occupied.
In laying down the grass I put 6cwt. of manure to the acre.
The greater part of the improvements were done during the currency of the Great War, when labour and material were both scarce and dear.
After a few enjoyable years of occupation, for family reasons only, I disposed of the little farm at a profit, and, for eight years, the purchaser has been successfully farming it.
What I did under great difficulties, younger men can do much better now if they will only work and forego the pleasure of play, race meetings, etc.
The Minister of Lands can know very little of the potentialities of the North.
Sir Apirana Ngata’s policy
Bay of Plenty Times, December 30, 1929
In commenting upon Sir A. T. Ngata’s policy of breaking in large blocks of land by organised native labour, subdividing it, and settling on it those whose labour has contributed to its development, a North Island paper states that there are hundreds of thousands of acres that could be broken in cheaply by massed organised labour, which under individual effort unsupported by essential machinery, would take years to bring to production point and at a cost incomparably greater.
The creation of a company of land workers, who could, for either Government or private individuals, contract to take and break in blocks of land expeditiously and efficiently, would in itself be an asset to New Zealand.
Effect on valuations
Department’s methods
Court questions practice
New Zealand Herald, November 28, 1939
[By telegraph—own correspondent]
Palmerston North, Monday
Further interesting evidence detailing methods by which land valuers work was given at a sitting of the Assessment Court inquiring into objections to Government revaluations in the Manawatu County.
Two valuers called by the department stated that they did not allow as improvements initial cultivation and cropping prior to the establishment of virgin land in pasture, because the owner derived benefit from the crop, which recouped him for the expenditure.
If a farmer spent £5 an acre breaking in land to pasture, and in the process got back £2 an acre from the crop sown, then the real cost of breaking in the ground could only be regarded as the difference of £3 an acre.
The chairman, Mr. A. A. McLachlan, of Christchurch, questioned whether such a practice was a correct one.
He contended that what was done in the original cultivation had an unexhausted value for all time.
For instance, in the particular case before the Court the owner used large quantities of lime, and although he got back something in the first crop the lime was still having its beneficial effect and so should be allowed for and allowed for as an improvement.
Counsel for the objecting ratepayer stated that it was just as necessary for his client to use lime in the initial process as it was for him to fall scrub.
The Chairman: If a farmer benefits in the initial crop, then it should be regarded as a windfall.
- Source: Papers Past