COST OF PRODUCTION 239 
ticular lines was made, and the result thus far, when 
we take into account the lack of time and the scarcity 
of data, must be regarded as satisfactory. Comprehen- 
siveness is not in any way claimed as an advantage 
of the investigation. Far from it. In fact, the work 
is open to some of the greatest objections to which 
statistical work is liable. The limited area -which the 
investigation covers, and the shortness of the period for 
which it was made, are such fundamental disadvantages. 
But adequate support has already been given to the 
claim that the estimates. possess the advantage of being 
representative. 
The method employed in the work is certainly more 
accurate than that wherein certain estimated values 
are given to each operation in production. These are 
probably contractor’s prices, but they have little or 
no equivalent in actual practice, for the contract system 
has become obsolete, and now farmers almost uni- 
versally own all the implements and stock necessary for 
production. Much of this is kept for several other 
purposes besides wheat production, so that cost of 
production is lowered to a certain degree. 
In the light of the various estimates which have been 
presented, what position must be taken up in regard to 
the question whether wheat growing is profitable or not? 
With pre-war prices it cannot be denied that the margin 
of profit was not large when the many difficulties which 
the producer experiences are considered. Such problems 
as the labour supply, satisfactory marketing, uncertainty 
of yield, probable losses of fertility, are rather formidable 
with even the most resourceful of producers. If the 
problem is considered relatively to pastoral farming, it 
must be admitted that the latter pursuit is much too 
alluring for the wheat farmer in the light of recent 
events. But it is very uncertain how far the transition 
from cereal growing to pastoral farming in Canterbury 
