The dispute between the cow owner and grazier over stock condition had reached such a low point that helicopters were used to ferry in staff in the early hours of the morning, roads were blocked and yards on a neighbouring farm were used to load the cattle out.
The stock owner had stopped paying the grazier and the land owner had refused entry to him or any of his counsel.
Anderson Lloyd lawyer and partner Tim Black said the dispute, which occurred several years ago, was unpleasant, expensive and the result of people not talking to each other.
When a dispute ended up in litigation, it could cost both parties $20,000 in legal fees.
"You need to start talking and if you can't resolve it, don't walk away and stew over it and hope it resolves itself," Mr Black said.
Every year he saw disputes where parties had fallen out, mainly over cow condition at the end of the grazing contract, or unexpectedly numerous or unexplained cow deaths.
Problems tended to arise when the stock owner inspected his cows off the truck at the start of the grazing contract but did not view them again until the end, to find lame or skinny animals.
In these situations, both parties assumed the other was responsible for monitoring stock condition.
"Owners have a responsibility to set processes to monitor their stock, to have someone be their eyes and ears if they were not available."
Arbitration was the first attempt at resolution, but by the time lawyers were involved, Mr Black said positions were well entrenched.
He still saw examples of winter grazing contracts based on a handshake with nothing written down.
Ideally contracts should cover such things as the number of stock involved, the rate of pay, who was responsible for animal health, stock monitoring, whether the agreement included adding condition score or weight gain, assessing those measurements, the type and amount of feed to be supplied and the length of the contract.
Federated Farmers Southland Dairy section chairman Rod Pemberton agreed on the need for a contract and a resolution system.
In situations where a contract was not functioning well, the only out-clause for farmers was to remove their cows, which was not practical, because they had to put them somewhere else.
Winter grazing was an inexact science, he said, especially when the stock owner specified the volume of feed to be given to his cows.
That could be blown apart by a wet, cold period.
Mr Pemberton said this year showed just how difficult winter grazing was.
The dry summer and autumn tempered the yield of many winter crops, prompting many graziers to be conservative in the volume fed to cows.
But a sympathetic winter meant many crops were not eaten off completely.