Canterbury Chiller Beef Praised In London

Press, Volume XCVI, Issue 28415, 23 October 1957, Page 11

Canterbury Chiller Beef Praised In London

- The London judges praise the quality of the Canterbury entry for th? 1957 chiller type beei competition but they are critical of its handling and dressing. The 18 to 20 months Aberdeen Angus beasts from the Lands and Survey Department’s Rose Hill property. Methven. which were placed first and second on the hooks in Christchurch were given the same positions in London, with an Aberdeen Angus from Campbell and Hart (Rakaia» . third. The Canterbury entry arrived too late for the competition m London because of the delay of the Sydney Star which was involved in a collision while it was on its way to the United Kingdom. Only Conjecture The judges say that because of the passage of time they could only conjecture how the Canterbury entry would have fared in the national competition, but they added: “We feel it would have been at least midwav, or even in the first flight, but for the inclusion of a young stag with one or two obvious bull characters. On the other hand, we think that No. 1528 (the Lanas and Survey beast olaccd first ;n the district competition) most probably would nave been included in the ’best six carcases

in the competition’ with No. 1527 (the second placed Rose Hui entry) running it very closely We remember that the district was faulted last year for some very wasteful entries, full of suet and overfat. This time there was a good deal less criticism on that account. The weights also were splendid and altogether this district has gone right ahead.” “Outstanding Body” The judge’s comments on the first three carcases are:— Land and Survey Department (Rose Hill): ’’This was an outstanding body, short in the hocks, generally very compact and filled with excellent flesh. The finish was fairly well completed, with sufficient but no excess of Fuet or fat. except the cods were a trifle heavy.” Lands and Survey Department (Rose Hill): “Very little to choose between this one and the win-

einer. except that the finish was ? I slightly overdone with the suets t being a trifle heavy and the cod l|fats also. The fat covering the [buttocks also was thicker than lion the winner but with no inincrease in the marbling of the 1[ flesh. Ail the same a most exi celler.t exhibit.” ; .._ Campbell , and Hart <Rakaia>: i “The exhibitor obviously knew . how to obtain well marbled flesh i yet without excess suet, nor excess ' fat anywhere. Although slightly coloured.' this was a commercial I body, well fleshed and with i marbling such as is seldom seen i without blobs of excess fat in - patches or indeed all over.” 5 “The handling and dressing was • very much below par and unworthy of the very fine product,” said the judges’ report. “. . . . l we ■would add that criticism such t as .we offer to the source of our ■ supplies in various parts of the I world keeps them aware of requirements necessary to main1 tain the high values. We cannot sufficiently stress the importance • of good presentation, and in this i particular district. quartering. • sawing, aitch splitting and the ■ most thorough cleansing ot ah ; blood or other animal deposit, call for very much more attention.”