THREAT TO N.Z. LAMB

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22355, 19 March 1938, Page 22

THREAT TO N.Z. LAMB

*o the editor or the press. Sir, —Under the heading, “Threat to New Zealand Lamb,” Mr Orbell is reported as having demanded that farmers should be allowed to run their business without interference from “townspeople and noisy politicians.” This is amusing, When one thinks of the way the farming community has fawned on past and present politicians for assistance. If a businessman cannot make his business pay he goes out via the Bankruptcy Court; but if the farmer cannot show a big profit he turns to the Government for a little more assistance —all, be it added, at the expense of the townspeople. Mr Deans was right in stating that fat lamb growers must combat Australian competition by improving local quality. In the first place, too many farmers forget’ the fact that' their rams are “half the flock.” Price is the only consideration; and they are terribly hurt if they have to pay more than three or four guineas for their rams. As for the ewes, the less said the better. Our fat lambs are mostly got by nondescript rams from ewes ranging from coarse crossbreds—almost goats, some of them—to so-called Corriedales, which more often than not are poor-constitutioned, ill-formed, inbred halfbreds. And our fat lamb quality is slipping. No wonder! The first step to improve quality should be for farmers to stay at home and work and not spend quite so much, time discussing imaginary troubles. Second, let them take the long view, and keep their best ewe lambs to build their flocks instead of grabbing for the extra id per lb these lambs may bring. To return, to Mr Orbell’s remarks, just imagine the howl if he were taken at his word! Cut out guaranteed prices, fertiliser subsidies, free railage, etc., and let the farmers settle their own destiny? Whilst on the subject of farmers and their work, I wish to refer to a discussion on hemlock at a recent Farmers’ Union executive meeting. Not one of these representative farmers knew anything of the subject. One suggested that it was quite a harmless weed, and another thought it was only a biennial and could be killed by cutting it down for two seasons. Finally, it was decided to appeal to Lincoln Collegeto undertake research. For the, benefit of those interested, I think I am perfectly safe in saying that, unless attacked promptly, this noxious weed—don’t forget the adjective—will spread more quickly than gorse, and take far more eradication. The only method of dealing with it that I know of is to dig it out—the roots go down about two feet—and when it reappears, dig it out again. Hard work, I know, but, as I understand that hemlock is poisonous to stock, it is worth while. And of course our farmers thrive on hard work.—Yours, etc.. ONE-TIME FARMER-' March 18, 1938.