The recent war has occasioned even greater changes in agricultural production than followed World War I. Lack of man power and draught power reduced the area of cultivation : lack of fertiliser and manure reduced the yields per acre: lack of feeding stuffs reduced livestock numbers and the output of meat, milk and eggs. This was precipitated at a time in history when it was already becoming evident that, despite improvement in agricultural technique, the output of food per acre over the world was rising comparatively little.

The pre-war agricultural problem, never clearly seen until recent years, of expanding production to meet the requirements of an increasing population, has become gravely accentuated by the additional problem of agricultural recovery following the second world war.

It was withsomereluctance that Iconsented tospeakon this subject this morning for two very good reasons, the first being thatourexperimentsonthissubjectwhicharenow under way atCambridge(and which some of you at least have seen and know something of) have not yet reached the point when anything can safely be published, and the second that, apart from these experiments, I have very little to say on the subject that is new or that I can support with sufficient exact data which is not already well known to most of you.

In view of this you may very well wonder why my reluctance was overcome.The answer is simple; it was because I believe thesubject to be so important, and also because I havehad very considerable practical experience of it spread overmanyyears.

I am not setting up to be an expert on the raising of store cattle in general and I propose now to tell you something of my own experiences from the Hill Farmers', angle and to air my favourite theory that a tremendous increase in beef production (as well as in other commodities) could come from the upland grazings of this island.

The question I asked myself ,right away, back in 1930, was would cattle live on the hills during the winter? All that I ever saw on the hills were just the local small.herds in summer on the rough grazings on what we call in Wales, Ffridd land, in Scotland, and North of England, Inbye land; enclosed by a fence or a stone wall, near the homestead.

In Scotland there is an area of nearly eleven million acres which is classed as “ Rough Grazing.” Not all of this vast acreage is suitable for the grazing of cattle, nor can the hand of man ever make it so; much is between 2,000-4,000 feet above sea-level where, by a combination of height, climate and lack of shelter, cattle do not normally range. Other parts consist mostly of rock and scree and grow such scanty herbage that even the blackface ewe visits them but occasionally. Nevertheless, there are vast areas in Scotland which can maintain large herds of breeding cows of a hardy type. As an incentive to farmers to stock such land with cattle, a yearly sum of £7 is paid for every cow kept throughout the year on this type of land. This same sum is also paid to Scottish farmers for every cow kept on what are classed as “ Upland “ farms. These farms may be said to embrace all those that are in receipt of assistance under the Marginal Production scheme. The total area of all farms so assisted during 1948 was 300,000 acres. Here then is another considerable area where the production of beef cattle should be developed to no small extent. It is a fact, however, that dairying has been, and will continue to be, one of the main operations on many of these upland or marginal farms. Some of them actually go in for the production and sale of milk, but the majority concentrate on the rearing of young dairy stock. There is a tendency for some of these farmers to turn from the dairy side of their business and develop to a greater extent the production of beef store cattle. The inducement of a yearly payment of £7 per cow is largely responsible for such a change, as no payment is made for any cows kept for the production and sale of milk, although a dairy type of animal rearing a calf or calves would be eligible.