BRANDING OF CATTLE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19274, 12 March 1926, Page 8

BRANDING OF CATTLE.

DAMAGE DONE TO HIDES. FARMERS' HEAVY LOSSES. change; in method needed. [by telegraph.—own correspondent.] WELLINGTON", Thursday. Should cattle be branded and. if so, on what part of the hide ? In view of the fact that it is estimated the farmers of New Zealand are losing £150.000 to £200,000 annually through indiscriminate fire branding on the best part of the hide, these questions are of particular moment to the fanning community. Recently at the quarterly meeting of the Dominion executive of the New Zealand Farmers' Union the Question of the branding of cattle was discussed and the general secretary was asked to furnish information to members of the union relative to the matter. In a circular to be sent out by him it is stated:—"ln 1924 some 595,000 ox hides and 800.000 calfskins were produced in New Zealand, but from 50 per cent, to 90 per cent, of the former were spoiled to some extent through branding on the rump. The most valuable part of a hide is the rump and it lias been estimated by tanners that the careless branding on this part of the hide reduces the market value of each hide by about ss. This means that the farmers of New Zealand are losing £150,000 to £200,000 annually through indiscriminate fire branding on the best part of the hide. "New Zealand tanners assert that it is the exception to get a single hide free of brands and for that reason they have to import hides without brands from time to time as market conditions allow from Ireland, Switzerland, France and Italy. This is unsound business, as New Zealand money is going into the pockets of foreigners instead of into the pockets of our local farmers. In addition the cost of articles made from this imported leather is naturally increased owing to the freight from the other side of the world. "It must also be remembered that the cost of tanning a bad hide is exactly the same as for a good one. Thoughtlessness in most cases ic the cause of spoiling good hides by rump branding, but some owners assert that a brand would not be easilf- seen on the neck or shoulder. From a conimonsense point of view the best place for the'.branding is that p t irt of the hide which is least valuable. The tanning industry of New Zealand is feeling the effect of competition in leather from England and the United States without having local hides spoiled, with this form of blemish. . . s "In order to minimise this evil as much as possible the New Zealand Tanners' Association is making strenuous endeavour to have the following clause inserted in the New Zealand Stock Act: —'That the brand be 1 permanently applied to the skin. In the case of cattle the branding shall not .be less than 2in. in height and not more than 6in. in width and shall be applied by being burned into the skin only on the shoulder or neck by a branding iron or in such manner as may be prescribed.' " Recent investigations with officials of the Jive stock division regarding fire branding have revealed the fact that branding amendments have been under consideration for some time, one of these being an alteration to the present system by making the earmark the legal mark or brand. In that event a fire brand would be an additional optional znark.