Conventional wool classing rejected

Press, Volume CXIV, Issue 33581, 9 July 1974, Page 14

Conventional wool classing rejected

Conventional procedures in wool handling had led to an bsurd fragmentation of wool derived from a flock of sheep, Professor K. J. Whiteley, of the University of New South Wales, told a seminar in Christchurch yesterday on objective measurement of wool.

He was referring to the practice of a clip being subdivided . into a number of lots for sale. The view that classing of the Australian clip increased uniformity was entirely wrong, said Professor Whitely, professor of fibre science at the School of Woo) and Pastoral Science at the University of New South Wales. The most important thing happening in Australia in this field was occurring on the farm, he said. Objective clip preparation resulted in larger lots, and this made it possible for testing of these lines to be carried out at a reasonable cost. The chief appraiser at the Wool Research Organisation at Lincoln (Mr M. M. Agar) supported Professor Whiteley’s views from investigations made in Canterbury. He said it appeared that in manv clips the separation of wool for fibre diameter achieved little or nothing in terms of providing lots of more even fibre diameter for the buyer to deliver to the manufacturer. LARGE GATHERING About 200 people drawn from most sectors of the wool industry attended the seminar. They included growers, selling brokers, private buyers, auction buyers, merchants, manufacturers, and scientists. The managing director of the Wool Marketing Corporation (Mr W. J. Whineray) said the corporation, with the wool brokers’ and buyers’ associations, felt that the time was appropriate to review the progress being made with objective or scientific measurement of wool for sale and sale of wool by sample, and to exchange ideas on this and the direction that should now be followed. Mr Whineray said that there was fairly general and increasing agreement in New Zealand that there would have to be some basic improvements in wool handling and selling methods. The wool industry was labour intensive, and financial pressures were pushing everyone towards capital-intensive methods.

'TOO MUCH HANDLING" There was far too much handling of wool and too many processes at all stages in its sale, and too little streamlining of its movement from shearing floor to the final manufacturing user. “There is no doubt in my mind that unless ways are used of reducing the laboui costs inherent in the traditional system of selling wool, the industry is going to face

.sharp increases in the 1 future,” said Mr Whinerav. In 1967, the Wool Marketing Study Group had advocated that wool should be sold by sample, preferably in fewer types and larger standard type lots. The development of objective measurement had been seen as a necessary step towards this goal. But seven years later the progress towards these improvements in wool flow could only be judged as minimal. Much scientific research had been and was being carried out. SLOW PROGRESS However, in the practical field, progress had been painfully slow, and methods were basically the same as they had always been. Wide-

scale practical application of | pre-sale testing of wool appeared to be as far away 'now in New Zealand as in 11967, in spite of many I efforts. from different quarters to bring it into being In discussions of trials of sample selling of wool in the North Island in the past wool-selling season and which will be continued next season, some representatives of the buying trade expressed reservations, in par ticular about the samples of not less than five kilograms which will be displayed for their inspection. They said that they were not large enough, bearing in mind the guarantees that they had to give to those taking delivery of the wool that they bought.