DEHORNING CATTLE.

Northern Advocate, 24 July 1923, Page 6

DEHORNING CATTLE.

LEGISLATION ASKED FOR

The question of dehorning cattle was discussed at some length at the. annual conference of the Council of Agriculture last week.

The following remits were submitted on the subject:—"That the Agricultural Department be requested to issue a leaflet on the benefits of dehorning cattle and the best methods of dehorning." "That all cattle (registered purebreds excepted) be dehorned before attaining the age of two years; the Government to be asked to legislate in that direction."

Mr L. Watson (Oxford), in moving the remits, strongly supported the practice of dehorning.

Mr G. L. Marshall (Marton) said that the strongest argument in favour of dehorning had been that given by Mr Swift, of Chicago, who had stated that in all his hundreds of thousands of cattle there could scarcely be found one horned uninual. If they wanted good beef they must dehorn.

Sir Walter Buchanan said the presence of the remits on the order paper was not a very great tribute to the common sense of cattle-grower s , either in this country or in England. We had been indebted to America in the past for advice which had put thousands of pounds into the pockets of New Zealand pastoralists. He had understood from the Director-General of Agriculture that it was intended to bring in legislation to make it compulsory to dehorn all cattle. He did not understand why a compulsory Act had not been introduced long ago. He had trucked a ■consignment of registered Shorthorns, and had had 25 per cent, damaged cither by rough handling in the truck or through the cattle not being dehorned.

Mr A. G. Hart (Timaru) thought it was not the duty of the Government to go about dehorning cattle.

Dr. C. J. Reakes, Director-General of the Agricultural Department, said that as fur as beef mas concerned there was no question but that dehorning was the best practice. The Live Stock Division had had records taken which showed that a great deal of damage was done by the horns of animals ou their way to the slaughter-houses. The remits were adopted.

At a special meeting of the executive of the Flaxmillers' Association last week, under the chairmanship of Mr A. Seifert, dissatisfaction was repressed at the Government's decision to grant an extra duty of 6d pe>r i">n on hemp graded, tho amount to be subsidised £1 for £1 up to £290, to assistexperimental work in connection with the cultivation of flax. It was expla tied that the amount was totally inadequate. particularly in view of the information supplied to the Department, and an inspection of the work in regard to yellow leaf disease at Miranui. It was mentioned that merchants made subscriptions, showing that th.'V were impressed by what was bei ig done to improve the industry. In response to a question, Mr Seifert sai 1 that * he would require £1000 a year, but as an absolute minimum ho coul.l probably manage on £750. Other speakers said it was a question of getti lg a substantial subsidy or abandoning the experimental work. After a lengthy (li cussion, a motion that the flaxmdlers could not see their way clear to continue unless £1000 was forthcoming was carried unanimously, it being also decided to get in touch with members of Parliament.