CRAYFISH MEAL SAVES SHEEP FROM DROUGHT

Manawatu Times, Volume LV, Issue 7169, 17 March 1930, Page 10

CRAYFISH MEAL SAVES SHEEP FROM DROUGHT

forth African Experiment feed Properties of FISH OFFAL EXPLOITED

Sheep breeders will bo keenly interested in some feeding experiments which have been carried out in South-west Africa with sheep under drought conditions, says the Cape Times. Professor Th. Classen, who is in close touch with the subject, says that the feeding was carried out with Luderitz crayfish meal, manufactured by the Angra Fishmeal Company at Luderitz, whose factory is claimed to be the first of its kind in South Africa. Professor Classen writes as follows: “The meal is manufactured from fresh offal from the canning factories. It should be remembered that only the pure flesh of the tail of the crayfish is canned. This part forms only about 20 per cent, of the total weight of the animal, the other 80 per cent., consisting of the body, legs and shell, usually being discarded as offal and dumped into the sea. But this ‘offal’ contains the most valuable parts of the ‘animal’s body—flesh, inner organs and shell. “At Luderitz, this offal is converted into a highly efficient feeding meal for stock and poultry by an entirely new process. It is crushed, quickly dried in a partial vacuum at low temperatures, and ground into meal. Tho meal thus contains all the valuable constituents of the body of the crayfish in a perfectly digestible form. “As any overheating during the drying process is avoided, the resulting meal is light in colour, flaky and perfectly digestible. The feeding experiments prove that it is greedily taken by the animals and easily absorbed by them, and as the meal contains very little oil, it does not taint. “It is especially interesting from an economical point of view that this new product is manufactured in South-west Africa from a raw material which until recently has been regarded as offal. It is now turned into a product which may prove an exceptional asset to farmers.

“The experiment in feeding sheep was carried out by Mr. Hoffman, a farmer at Otjihase, South-west Africa. He experimented with a flock of 40

valuable and healthy Karakul ewes during tho driest months of the year, Au-gust-September, when the grazing was very poor and the sheep'suffered from lack of pasture. * Thi? flock of 40 ewes, which were at the beginning of the experiments all in the same condition, was divided into two groups of 20 each. Tho experiments were discontinued after two months, when the rains started and the grazing became good.

“The 20 animals used for the experiments in feeding each received every night, after their return from the pasture, lQOgr. (approximately 3} ounces) of crayfish meal, which they took eagerly. After the first month their cimbined weight had increased by 341 b. Tho weight of the control animals had decreased by 271 b., a difference of 61 lb. in favour of the meal-fed animals. “After two months the meal-fed animals had further increased by 21b., but the control animals had lost 881 b. more, owing to the poor grazing. “This left a net gain in weight in 901 b., or about 4Jlb. a head. Thus, in two months, the 20 animals receiving an additional ration of meal—all other conditions being the same—had gained if compared with the control animals 1511 b., or more than 7Jlb. a head. This result must bo considered remarkably good. “This means that a ration of 3Joz. of meal a day a head is sufficient to keep ewes in good condition, even durihg the worst drought. It is especially remarkable that not only did the animals keep their weight, but even slightly increased it during the experiment. “In respect to costs, a ton (1000 kilogrammes) of this meal costs approximately £l3. This quantity is sufficient for feeding 100 sheep during 100 days of drought, working out at a cost of 3d. a head a day. “The quantity of meal fed to 20 sheep during 60 days was 120 kg. (265 lb.), costing £1 11/2. The result was an increase in weight of 1511 b., or lib. meat for every lflb. of crayfish meal. It must be remembered that the experimental animals were grown-up ewes, not young, growing animals. In the latter case the Tesults would have been more favourable.”