THE RURAL TRANSPORT PROULEM.
Page 16
Page 17
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Disadvantages of the A grail System and the Superiority of the Road Motor.
T. HERE is no more urgent matter facing the agriculturist of the present day than that of transport. The day of the team and the ponderous farm wagon for road work has gone—that is, gone from the sphere of economy—and, unfortunately, advantage has not been taken sufficiently of modern methods. The railway, too, is inconvenient, cumbersome, and expensive for short distances, Looked at from a broad general standpoint, the problem of rural transport would .appear to present three principal aspects :—(1) Transport on the farm itself ; (2) the question of connecting up one farm and village with another • (3) the question of thus bringing all the farms together as well as the .villages and connecting them up with the main market-places, towns and other important centres.
Good roads on the farms to link up the whole of the land with the homestead are absolutely essential for the economical working of a modern farm.
The suggestion has been made ,that, along these roads, and to connect all the fields, should be laid systems of light railways, and the Government offers to provide sets of rails which have been used for the transport of men and materials behind the lines in France. One is here driven to ask the question: why rails if roads have to be made also? RoadMaking is expensive enough, and to suggest that an additional outlay for laying down, railways on it should Jele incurred is simply ridiculoui. These rails would be of very little use, and the cost quite beyond the reach of the farmer.
It may he true that lines for a light railway can be laid anywhere permanently or temporarily, and be taken up and relaid according to necessity. But the capital outlay needed to putqlown a railway—even a light railway—is enormous, and as high in proportion for removing and relaying temporary expedients, the amount of labour and cost of materials involved being KO great. The labour entailed in removing and resetting metals is altogether too great to be recompensed by the usefulness of a light railway when it is laid down.
The only conceivable instance where rails might be of economical use to the farmer is in the case of trucks on rails about the farm buildings for the purposes of conveying feeding stuffs from the mixing house to the byres and sheds, and the manure from these places to the manure heaps or pits. Under certain conditions, rails may be useful on a highly productive arable farm. An example is to be found on the farm of Mr. Fred Hiarn, near Ely, the biggest potatogrowing farm in the country. The cost now of making a light railway for ordinary purposes is so great in comparison with motor transport that the thing becomes quite uneconomical.
The narrow-gauge,light railway, or the Agrail, is Of 3338
very little real value except where there is a considerable local traffic such as is the case with new building operations, large factories or in trench warfare. The Agrail is useful only for the transport of heavy loads of small bulk for short distances, travelling at a, very slow speed. It is essential that the modern farm should have good roads linking up every part of the farm with the main buildings. Read-making is expensive and may cost £100 a mile or more, according to the price and availability of materials. The idea that along these roads should be laid light railways is simply monstrous, costing, as it does, anything from 21,000 to £2,000 a mile to construct such railways. In addition to this, the straggling lines of the farm would have to be brought together in a centre, which in its turn would have to be . connected with the nearest main line, and there would be the great cost of erecting stations, switches, signals, shunting gear, and
other little items. Further, the system does not lessen but accentuates the bugbear difficulty of transhipment. In the handling of farm produce, this is one of the greatest drawbacks to good marketing and an expensive item. With the light railway there would be more, instead of less, of it, because the produce would have to be taken to the light railway trucks, either by carts or some other means which constitutes its first handling in course of transit ; then it is loaded on to the light railway truck, taken to the ordinary railway station and is there loaded in the big trucks, and the usual unloading and reloading at the destination end of the journey is thus a matter of course.
This has brought us to that aspect of the pro-blem dealing with the question of linking up the farms and villages together and connecting them with main centres. The advocates of the light railway idea suggest that the main lines shoull run along the roads.
I propose to pass4hriefly over this suggestion for the present except to point out again the danger of having raised rails on the public highway, and the cost that would be involved in the necesSary widening of some of the roads, as I am dealing here chiefly with the case of the agriculturist. As to the need for light, railways the better to connect up our rural districts, that is another matter. Even there the earrow gauge would not be of any great benefit. It would,not, as previously pointed out, solve the problem of transhipment, but would increase it, and passenger traffic can be dealt with -much more quickly and effectively by motor omnibuses or railway trains. Many districts need to be better served by the broadgauge railway, which, however, is only a part solution of the problem. 'But, to show what it would mean to connect one farm with another, with the village, railway station,
or other centre we will suppose, for purposes of illustration, that :a farmer constructs on his farm four miles of light railway. His farm is six miles from the point he wishes to be connected with and he decides to lay down this extent of lines—a total of ten miles. As already noted the laying of light railways costs from 21,000 to 22,000 a mile. For the sake of argument we will assume that the farmer was able;t6:get the job lime cheaply, and it cost him on the average 11,000 a mile, which would give a total .of. 210,000., At five per cent. the annual interest on this sum would amount to £500. itself sufficient to. purchase, a good motor lorry having far greater speed and utility, and an immensely:wider range:el activity. If it cost E15,.000, which is much nearer the mark, he' would on the interest alone get -his lorry, working expenses, and depreciation as well, and it may easily cost £20,000, the interest on which would buy two first-class motor lorries. .
Another point in regard to the light_railways lathe question when, would they be ready1 That question answered, and it will be seen that the business of the country cannot wait while they are being laid down and equipped. The farmer's difficulty must be solved immediately : it cannot be allowed to wait. It would seem that what is needed is better rbads on the farm itself, to facilitate the use of motor wagons, the laying . down of broad-gauge railways in districts ' iniserVed by railways,, and considerably extended use, of motor lorries and omnibuses. The 'farmer himself will have to take the matter in hand "While all these gdod things are coming, without waiting for the laying down. of railways or the establishment of motorbus services. The motor tractor should lidabl'e to do a good deal of the heavy hauling on the farm, .particularly if suitable, rciads are made ; it could be used for hauling a train of wagons to and from the station or any other centre.. A large ,tractor is not so economical when used with one wagon only. Then there are the motor lorries froth the 'small half:toimer upwards. The two-termer is the' farmer's great favourite.