STOCK EMBARGO

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21939, 13 November 1936, Page 16

STOCK EMBARGO

CRITICISM OF PRESENT POLICY OPINIONS AT SHORTHORN SOCIETY MEETING The lifting of New Zealand’s embargo on importing stock from Great Britain was advocated by Professor R. 35. Alexander, president of the Shorthorn Society of New Zealand, in his annual report, which vras presented at the annual meeting of the society yesterday. His contention was not supported by all the members present, although the report was adopted. “The body of opinion in favour of the-lifting of the embargo on the import of stock into New Zealand continues to grow. The attitude of continuing the embargo becomes more untenable each year," Professor Alexrndcr stated in his report. “New Zealand is the only country in the British. Empire where the embargo is retained. Canada, without the safeguard of a long sea voyage, has gone as far as to notify the British Ministry of Agriculture that detention in quarantine in London is no longer considered necessary. In view of this on grounds can' we reasonably maintain our present stand? “It has been said that there is no Deed to import to improve the standard of our herds. Given time we could, no. doubt, raise the standard by using the stock already in New Zealand, but the lifting of the embargo would assist breeders to attain that end in a shorter period. ITiat breeders are definitely of the opinion that new blood will assist is evidenced by the fact that breeders —not onlv of Shorthorns—are prepared to face the considerably greater expense of indirect importations to obtain from Britain the cattle they desire. America, which takes comparatively little from New Zealand, has benefited most by the restrictions placed, by New Zealand on importations from Britain, which is the Dominion's best customer.” Grounds for Fear Criticised The embargo had been imposed because of the fear of foot-and-mouth disease being brought into the country by livestock, said Professor Alexander in presenting the report. This fear was not soundly based, because it took six weeks for stock to be brought from England to New Zealand, and as foot-and-mouth disease developed rapidly, animals which had contracted it before they left would be dead before the ship reached New Zealand. The embargo was not going to keep the disease out of the country. Another aspect to be considered was thq desirability of putting as few restrictions as possible on the products of England. The promotion of goodwill was important. The chief danger that Professor Alexander saw in the removal of the embargo was the tendency of breeders to regard any imported stock as ipso facto better than stock already in the country. If the embargo were removed it would be wise for the breed societies to make an effort to'see that only stock of high standard was imported.

Mr D. G. Wright opposed the advocacy or removal of the embargo. He did : not think that a breed society should advocate such a step. Great Britain itself had an embargo on the impost of livestock for breeding purposes. The goodwill aspect was bethe point. The more difficult importing was made the better the stock imported would be. Until the English authorities could stamp out foot-and-mouth disease New Zealand should do nothing that would make it easier to bring’ that disease into this country. Many things imported had proved harmful, even though experts had previously declared that there was no danger. "

Mr A. Hunter said that' the higher cost 6t importing by an indirect route meant that less of the money spent was actually for the animal. Mr Jphn Deans said that the British embargo was imposed because of the nearness of the Continent, from which the time of travel was so short that if made the introduction of disease easy. ’Mr D. J._ Holden said that what was wanted was closer supervision at the Hew Zealand end. The repeat was adopted. i