SHEEP DRENCHING

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXIII, Issue 80, 16 March 1933, Page 11

SHEEP DRENCHING

USE OF CARBON TETRACHLORIDE. CAUTION IS NECESSARY AT FIRST Care should be taken with the administration of carbon tetrachloride to sheep, according to a report appearing in the “Sydney Morning Herald’’ of research work undertaken by the McMaster Animal Health Laboratory. Dr. I. Chmics Ross, director of the McMaster Animal Health Laboratory within tho University grounds, stated that where tho drug had never been previously employed caution was necessary in carrying out fust treatment in the use of carbon tetra-chloride for the control of fluke and stomach worms. This was due to the fact that certain sheep showed higher susceptibility to the drug owing to factors which were not yet fully understood. To this, Dr. Clunics Ross said, was probably due the doubt which was sometimes expressed as to the wisdom of using carbon tetra-chloride repeatedly. It had booh suggested that not only might it affect the general condition of the sheep adversely, but that, tho wool of such sheep was niurli harsher and less attractive tjian t' I of undrenched animals. Exporime had recently been, carried out by the Council for Bcientifie ead Industrial

Research in various States of the Commonwealth, to determine, in addition to the value of tho drug in controlling the effects of worm infestation, the effect on wool production and wool character. It had been found in one field trial that a material increase in wool production was brought about, and in no case was the character of the wool affected adversely; but, on the contrary it compared very favourably with that of undronchod sheep. These results were obtained in sheep which had been drenched at monthly intervals for one year. This was more frequently than would usually be the case under field conditions. It might be mentioned, Dr. Clunies Ross added, that in certain American trials where deaths followed carbon tetra-chloride drenching, sheep had been drenched with scc's of the pure drug, or 5 times the dose employed in Australia, and had received 33 treatments at weekly intervals. Such a method of treatment was never likely to. be necessary, nor advocated in Australia.