Embargo on Live Stock

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 207, 29 May 1936, Page 13

Embargo on Live Stock

Sir,—l read with dismay “Interested’s” inconsistent letter on the above subject. I wonder we are able to sell any live or dead stock, they being such deteriorated rubbish I His romantic criticism of our stock is really an unjust reflection on those breeders who have spent their lives iu improving their stock, not altogether by foreign purchase, but by selection, and that is how British breeders attain their standards, there being no outside countries for them to draw from. Why can’t New Zealand do likewise? In New Zealand there is a class of farmer —like the gct-rich-quick, if I may use the simile —who buy part of some breeder’s stud, then import a stud and, of course, jump into the top circle and are breeders of renown. A member of a London wool broker's firm toured Wairarapa, Hawke’s Bay. and Manawatu, and he told me that he had s| 'n some of the finest Romney sheep and wool, and that there was none better grown in any part of the world. That was 20 years ago. and flocks have improved ever since. In the 'nineties flock ram studs would, be only good enough for wethers now. The improvement is being made chiefly by selection. “Interested” misses the main point when citing our sales to Argentina, Patagonia, and South America generally, and that point is cleanliness: no foot-and-mouth disease in New Zealand—one of the three clean countries in the world. I have in a scrap-book pages of extracts taken from the English publications quoting information asked for and laid before Parliament recording as many as 37 outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease in one year. To my mind the pity is that all these advocates for lifting the embargo cannot have a small taste of this pernicious disease. Importers complain against the present costly back-door method of procuring stock. I say they can easily reimburse themselves by charging a few guineas extra Cor their individual products. I wonder if it strikes “Interested” bow few British breeders benefit by New Zealand purchases? A score or more all told: why endanger our clean farms to benefit a lew individuals? Why the tirade about, non-reciprocity—making a mountain out of a molehill? Were it nut for the London quarantine the British Isles would sell very little live stock, yet even with this precaution a bull shipped from London to Africa was the centre of an outbreak, and our veterinarians know this to be a fact and make sundry excuses. I am not interested iu importing, but very much concerned in keeping New Zealand still one of the three clean countries in existence. If this disease is due here some day, I ask why open the door aud hasten the calamity?—l am, etc., v.D.P. Pahiatua, May 2(5.