CARTAGE OF STOCK

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 74, 21 December 1937, Page 13

CARTAGE OF STOCK

Road Licences Opposed By Railway Department

OBJECTIONS OVERRULED

By TelcgruplL—Press Association. Christchurch, December 20.

The case for the railways against the encroachment of road transport in stock cartage was pleaded before the No. 3 Transport Licensing Authority, Mr. T. H. Langford, to-day. Mr. Langford had before him several applications from road operators for permission to carry stock to freezing works. They were granted, although a list of objections was entered by tiie Railways Department. For the department, Mr. W. Rodger entered a submission that if certain road licences were granted it would be to the detriment of the public's investment in the railway system. These licences were not necessary nor desirable, he maintained. Tiie department had provided every possible convenience in sheep-loading races and yards at the stations, reasonable rates and adequate train service and special trucks. The volume of rail traffic bore this out, but if these licences were granted there was no possible doubt that the traffic they secured would be diverted from the rail. Statements showed, Mr. Rodger contended, that the freezing companies themselves preferred rail transit, and that the percentage of bruised stock was lower when tiie animals were received by rail. When companies bought “on tile hooks” the farmer, not being in possession of the facts about bruising, was encouraged to send by road. •

The forwarding of grain, stock and other produce coincided, and if extensions were given to road operators to cart stock they could not be carting grain and produce too, and this must seriously interfere with grain cartage to the detriment of farmers and tiie Railways Department. The position would be further aggravated with the use of header harvesters. Any further encroachment by road operators on the rights of the department would no doubt have a tendency to cause the layby of its plant, Mr. Rodger contended. Air. R. A. Young, who appeared for a transport operator, said that the operators had been working on temporary licences for some time, and with the granting of their applications now the position would be practically unchanged. It appeared that even with the operation of road services there was still full work for the department. Road services provided more direct handling, particularly in districts where there was not a frequent train service.

Mr. Langford said the argument over losses on one method of transport as opposed to another did not have much substance. Much depended on the care of the individual carrier. He considered it desirable in the public interest that road operators should have access to freezing works with milk lambs, because of the possible inadequacy of tiie rail service. Buyers used the rail when possible, but it was not always suitable, and road transport would provide the additional flexibility required.