JERSEY BREEDERS.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 17 October 1924, Page 7

JERSEY BREEDERS.

PROVINCIAL COUNCIL. ORDINARY MEETING. There was a fair atendance of members at the ordinary meeting, Mr F. Ran ford (president) in the chair. Members present were as follow: E. Hoskin. d. Pettigrew, J. S. T. Short, F. Hollard, J? Nicolson. F. A. •Kurth, J. N. Sampson, D. Malone, E. K. Li’.iueil, D. O’Sullivan, R. McCoy, apology for non-attendance. After a few brief preliminary remarks, the president said that inglewood delegates- had unfortunately not been able to be present to move the remits opposite their name. He therefore formally moved these remits. Mr F. Hoskin seconded. After a brief discussion, both were rejected. 0. Meuli. Mr A. J. Barr (secretary) was also present, Mr Petersen (Brixton) forwarded an apoiogy for non-attendance. . Stratford* remit No,. 1 was moved by the president: “That it he a recommendation to the Councils of the New Zealand Jersey Breeders-' Association, in lieu of existing subsidies, to subsidise semi-official testing breeders to the extent of half the testing fee for the first cow in each year.” In moving this remit,. Mr Ranford urged that •f it were carried it would be a saving m expense in subsidies. Re made an estimate of the Jersey . breeders at about 150 in any one year. The paying of a subsidy would he an incentive to youy.g breeders who perhaps tested only one cow, and would thus tend tc, bring up the productive capacity of the breed. Mr O’Sullivan approved of the suggestion, and said it would help'young breeders. Mr Linnell said he saw a difficulty in the remit, and at his .suggestion it was amended by inserting in place of ‘in lieu of existing subsidies” the words ‘‘in lieu c.f subsidy 'of'£l Is for each hundred pounds of fat over standard.” He said the main idea was to "educe the testing fees to the young breeder and to the “hard up cockie.” He added that the original, motion would serve to assist owners who were mostly well-to-do men. To them the getting of a subsidy would not mean much, but to the small man it -would be a. great help generally in the inter* ests of the breed. It might- not lead to. an increase in the number of tested cows, but would popularise the breed. His reasons for wishing it carried were that lie considered that the Council should do something to put them on a par with the Friesian people, so that fh-ey could go after them and ( catch them. Mr Kurth agreed that it would be x help to..vr>iing breeders. The chairman said it would not lie necessary to increase the subscription to the association. There was no bettei thing they could do than to encourage testing, and thus raising the average output. Mr. O’Sullivan said he was going to support the matter, though of. no benefit to him personally, because he would look at it in a broad way. Mr. Sampson also supported the remit, and hoped it would benefit individual breeders and clubs. The remit was carried. Mr. Linnell moved the remit No. 2 from Stratford: “That it be a recommendation to the council to make it obligatory on breeders to have a private brand, preferably a tatoo earmark, as a means of identification quite apart from the compulsory fire brand of the club.” Speaking, to the motion, Mr. Linnell instanced the case of a breeder buying a lot of cattle and the difficulty he had at present in keeping a correct record of the pedigree of each, A tar brand or tag brand was liable to get lost, and the animals should lie fire branded. It would not be an expensive matter. 'One set could' be available for each club, and this would obviate a lot of trouble. The chairman agreed that when buy. ing a number they could honestly get mixed, and clubs should endeavour to overcome this drawback. Mr. O’Sullivan, said some breeders had no private mark, and it was most important to give satisfaction to buyers. Mr. Kurth argued against too many brands and said a very small brand was all that was required to identity when re-selling took plaice. Air. Nicolson said all that was required was to brand after the sale where a buyer secured a number. Mr. Sampson said that some bulls went through many sales, and thus lost all identification,, and m some cases this was a good thing. If it were a ireally good bull it would never lose its identity. It was for many reasons not wise to put on too many brands. Mr. Hoskin said it was for the breeder to mark his bulls and keep records yearly, - The remit was carried. Mr O’Sullivan moved the third Stratford remit: “That it be a recommendation to the Provincial Council to approach the A. and P. associations in Taranaki, with a view to providing two classes for cows over four years of age, viz.—one from four years "to six years, and the other for cows six years and over.” He said be hoped all would agree that the aged class was too unwieldy, and that it was not right that four and five-year-olds should compete with the really aged cows. He believed this kept many good animals out of the. ring, and there should be a special class for four up to six-year-olds. It would be good for A. and P. shows, and he honed would be in time to get in this year’s catalogues. The motion was seconded and carried without discussion. TRANSFER OF TESTED COWS. Mr Hoskin brought up the matter of buyers of cows under test having Lo pay an additional fee, which in some cases amounted to a large sum. He instanced a case where up to £l3 had to be paid. The chairman said he had a similar experience, and considered it most unfair. Mr Sampson said it arose out of the fact that a man was charged £lO 10s for the first cow and £3 3s on each subsequent cow. He drew attention to the fact that in case of transfers the department would be nut to more trouble and expense in testing and collecting. It was decided to get the secretary to write to the department to see if there was any rule re acquiring tested animals from another owner, and to circulate the reply to members.