STOCK AND GRAZING NOTES.

Otago Witness, Issue 2210, 9 July 1896, Page 5

STOCK AND GRAZING NOTES.

By Droves.

Weekly Stock Sales : Invercargill, Tuesdays. Burnside, Wednesdays Monthly : "Ashburton, Tuesdays Olinton pjdnwflon, Addington, Wednead ys an^ "Winton. Fortnightly: Periodically : Balclutba, Fridays Heriot, Kelso, and Ky«Gore, Tuesdays bum. Oamaru, Tuesdays. (Communications of interest ts •tookbreederi md dealer«"»r« cordUllj- invited. All jomaiunloatlous to reach Witness ofllo« not later than Monday night,]

The yarding of fat cattle at Burnside was 150 heid. Medium and light were largely represented as usual, and the sale was a dull one. Some few prime bullocks of good size brought from £9 to £10 10a; £6 lOi to £7 10s for medium, and £3 10s to £5 10s for light. There was not much life in the market, tho bad weather helping to make things dull.

In Canterbury fat cattle are not at pressnt plentiful, and the market there has improved a little, but their prices ara not yet equal to those ruling at Bar aside.

The yarding of sheep at Buraside was much larger than has bsen usual of late, nearly 4000 being sent in for sale. Even best quality aheep suffered a drop in price of from Is to Is 6d per head, and this can, I think, only bo accounted, for by the large yarding. As for the socontlquifity or mediani sheep, prices were lower by fully 2s, and several lots were turned out unsold. There should always be at this season a market for large numbers of prime freezer*, but for medium sheep or butchers' mutton tbe demand is always limited— perhaps particularly so at this time of year ; and it is very much in the interest of farmers that there should be Borne arrangement among the Helling agents to prevent these over large yardiogs. I cannot say that even the beat of the yarding were

I prime freezers. I consider they were medium | only, and that 12s 6d to Us was their value. I Some of the best of the yarding brought tip to I 14s 63, 8s to 9i being the price going for the bulk of the yardiug, and Borne good merinos brought 7a to Bs.

In Canterbury prices of both forward store sheep and freezers have been ruaniog very high again, and several lines of North Ofcago sheep have been s:>ld there lately. la this connection some remarks fcooi the Chriatchurch Press are worth, the consideration of graziers hare. The writer saya:— "We carefully inspeoted some of the shetp sent forward from OSago, and came to the conclusion that our friend* in the south have not quite grtuped the requirements of North Caaterbury export buyers. Briefly ib seemed to us that the.sheep baing only from three-quarters to seven-eighth? f ai were unduly handicapped ia being placed iv competition with tbe finithed article. We pass this hint ou to our southern friends in the hopa that they will find it worthy of some little consideration." I have no reason to doubt that this criticism ia ofcherwite than a perfectly fair one. Nevertheless it is * reproach to Oiago graziers, and one that should not b? allowed to remain. Why can we nob finish sheep off as well as North Canterbury graziers ?' lam inclined to think we have at least equal advantages with them for doing so. Last week prime freezsrs at Addingtoa made 16* to 18s 9J, maiden ewes 13s to 17a, prime heavy crossbred ewos 13s to 16a 6d. Compare these with the Burnside prioes, and one musb .conclude that we are nob on right lines, as ouc mutton, although good, is not of sufficiently finished quality to bring these high rates. Quality considered, there should ba no difference ia price ' between Addiogton and Burnside for sheep for freeziog as all is bought for the same market, of tea by the ' same buyer; ; and I have no reason to think there is. Then it is evident that we musb improve ouc qmlity and bring it up to Canterbury standard, and if any of my readers can tell me why we cannot do this ia Ofogo and Southland I hope tbey will do so, for the goouer we know it tbe better. Is oar breeding on wrong lines, are our methods wrong, or what is the matter ? This is no new thing. The reproach has continued long enough, and the remedy is worthy the consideration of our best men, who I hope will interest themselves in the sabj'ecfc. Ail landholders are interested, for if this state of matters C3ntinue3 and oaunot be remedied, the value of our land must depreciate. I oannot yet believe that we have nob in Obago and Southland equal facilities if properly applied for the production of high-class mutton in every way equal to Canterbury, and hope to see something attempted and done to pub us on an equal footing with our next-door neighbour as regards our reputation for prime mutton. If it cannot be done quite, surely we can come much nearer their standard quality than we at present apparently do.

Tbe demand for prime freezing lambs continues, and in Canterbury these are bringing 11s to 13* 6j, store lambs bringing 8s to 10s. Frozen latnb will always be a trade which New Zealand will keep for itself mainly, and it looks as if the demand was likely to further increase for next season.

As I have said before, I don't see how we era to keep up the highest quality in mutton while carrying on this increasing trade in frczen lambs. We have not managed to do it in the past at any rate.

At the end of my notes I append a letter which Mr A. H. Chapman has addresßed to tbe

Minister for Agriculture, laying before him & scheme for the destruction of rabbits. The letter is one that ehould receive the careful

'consideration cf agricultural and .pastoral societies and of farmers' clubs,, who shculd take it in hand and express their' views on 'it. Personally, I think Mr Chapman's scheme worthy of consideration. It may bo described thortlj as follows :— Firat of all, he advocates under a new ' rabbit law to practically outlaw the rabbit, and to enact that no person can have any property in rabbits. They would become practically Stale cattle and « outlaws with a price on their head. This new law would have to enact that no landholder should have the right to charge any rent, premium, or valuable consideration of any kind for the privilege of killing, rabbits on his land. Then the Government are to give a bonus on ill rabbitskins exported, making the bonus for' summer skins more than for winter ocej, so as to make the total value of skin?, taking the market value at the particular season aril ihe bonus value, equal to, say, Is 6d per lb all tho year round. He advoc_tes that men be allowed to kill rabbits anywhere, which, of course t means that anyone could kill his neighbours' rabbits if be wished. ' At first glapce one is apt to think that Mr Chapman's scheme would encourage rabbitfarming; but this is not so. "HespeaVs very firmly on this subject, and says that undoubtedly rabbit-fftrmiDg has been carried on in the past to a far greater extent than is geuerally known, and a study of his., plan shows that he desires to put an end to this state of things. He gives figures based on the export of rabbitskins for the three years 189294- to show that the coat of this bonus system would be about £50,000 per annum — a big sum, no doubt, but if the rabbit pest could in a few years be overcome by means of any tuch scheme, five times that amount would nob ba too much when it is considered that about one million sterling per annum is the loss to landowners in Ntw Zealand through the rabbit plague. The letter is a valuable contribution to tbe consideration of the question, and well irorthy of petu«al by all. If some such schema as Mr Chapman BUggests fails (b find favour with landowners, it will be because of the right of trespass it gives, although in a way this is provided against, [ am rather in favour of an even more drastic measure than Mr Chapman suggests. I am inclined to think that all property in the cabbit should vest in the Government alone, , _nd that they should either through the .local bodies or by themselves undertake the destruction' of the pest at all times of the year. Thi3 ivould bs costly, but would be affective, and the bonus suggested by Mr Chapman would go a long way towards paying expenses. Tho whole jountry should then b8 blocked. off and dealt with systematically. I have no fault to find with ohe department tn administering the present act. Tbe inherent, weakness of the act is th&t inspectors have great difficulty in making some do their duty in killing rabbits, aud that some farmers only perform this duty in a perfunctory manner, not being sufficiently intelligent to see Ih-tthe rabbit is a pest of the worst description. Even & rabbit tax per acre or per value to enable Government to grapple with the pest would bs preferable to the present system. I know some farmers continually growl it what Government are doing. Would the majority of our farming and pastoral com. munity like to have the rabbits left alone by iboliß-dng the department and all acts con. nected witb the pest P Unless some tcheme limilar to that under notice, or one giving Erovernment the sole control of the destruction of the rabbits, is brought .about, I think it not improbable that the Government may be obliged y give the rabbit best. I hope, however, that ihe farming community will carefully consider and adopt some proper scheme for recommendation to Government, and if possible work lojally under it, taking care that every individual is made to do his duty in conforming with it, both in spirit and according to the letter of such law. This has not been the case In the past. The apathy and careleisness of some farmers ht S cost -their neighbour! much, , md has prevented tbe present aofc or ths present Inspectors doing th« amount of good in allaying the rabbit pest that might otherwise have been expected of them. It seems, therefore, very ' necessary that some scheme to jet cid of this i difficulty should be brought about, Deab DfIOVER,— I enjoy your weekly notes i

in the Witness very much, and have great faith in your advice. There is a matter of soma importance to farmers which I wish to bring under your notice. I refer to the filthy condition that sheep and cattle trucks ace usually in. I have a little ♦' quiff" which I think would remedy matters— viz.. to have the floors 2in or 3in higher in the middle, something like the roof of a-r»ilway carriage, but with less rise iv tha middle ; in fact, 2iu would, I believe, be sufficient. The sheep would then work everything out, and it Would not cause the lower sheep undu9 pressure from those on the higher part. lam gl»d to see that you keep the effects of monopoly well before jour readers. Wo are under the whip here, and can send sheep to Addington profitably.— Yours truly, Ohau, Manaw&tu, June 23. E, H. Smith. I am glad to hear that any remarks of mine are appreciated. I strongly advocate co-opera-tion among fanners in managing the meat trade and other branches of the agricultural industry, but I only approve of real ca-opxTation, nut tuch miserable humfeug as we have iate'y seen coma to grief in the south. Thia never was cooperation, and is enough to make the name a byword among the farming community. The matter of the improved condition of trucks alluded to in this letter is also worthy of consideration by our fanners' clubs. I congratulate Mr James Sawera, of Wyndham, on his appointment as dairy instructor. It is quite needless for me to say much in his praise. The quality of his cheese as turned out for many years past at Bmce and Wycdham speaks for his ability, as does also the success of bw many pupils all tbrcugh New Zealand and Australia. In my opinion a better practical cheesemaker could not bs found anywhere, and I am glad to see one of cur own New Zealand men appointed. We have plenty more good men, and I am glad to think that a poßt of this kiud is always in view of cur beat men. lam sure Mr James Sawers'a appointment will meet with general approval. It certainly will among those who kcoiv him, and shortly among tto3e who have yet to have the opportunity of benefiting by his instruction and acquaintance. Mr James Sawers has taken charge of the cheese-making department at the Edendale Dairy School. The work thera goes oa well, and the lectures and di«cussious are most interesting and profitable. Some, very few, parties have written atout Mr MacEwan's fads, but it is generally thought that in so doing they have j ddy cTsp^aycd their own lamentable ignorance. | If thtse gentlemen knew M&cEwan they would j net co_6ider him faddy, whatever else they . might think him. Students evidently ap- ; predate his teaching, and many of them are men well up in their business. Great attention is being given to milk testing. The turbine testers are runuing well, and demonstrations have been givtn with the new Leffmann and Beam tester. Tbe quality of the cream when received into .the batter room is not always satisfactory, owing to the heavy feeding of turnips and carelessness on the part of milk suppliers. Even pasteurising does not bring round the desired condition when the milk is too far gone on arrival. In the separator room the new point of interest is the sharple3 separator. It is one ol the smaller c&pscities,' and is run by steam in direct contact with the bowl; The machine has bean running very smoothly since its erection, and is doing good work. Owing to the shape of the bowl causing a current of cold air over the cream the temperature is considerably reduced when pasting from the separator. Comparative tests are being made with the three' separators now ia use— viz., the De Laval, Alexandra, and tbe Sharpies. Tbe following is MR CHAPMAN'S SCHEME FOR DEALING WITH THE ■ RABBIT PEST. m tt __ o *' ot ; l s°' N - z " Mft y 2 9. 1896. Ihe Hon. the Minister for Agriculture, Wellington. Sir,— Referring to Gazette notice dated December 14, 1895, offering a bonus for a practical means of subduing the rabbit pest, I beg to submit the following scheme for the consideration of yourself and experts. In order to lay my scheme plainly before you, I must firat briefly review the present position respecting the rabbit pest. It is estimated by practical and experienced men that the presence of the rabbit pest iv the colouy is costing the colony many hundreds of thousands of pounds sterling every year, in uiuiiuished volume of produce and also in diminiihcd value of much of that which remains. Indeed, some exports climb as high as tho word million and above it in their estimation of the damage done yearly by the pest. But let us be moderate and use a much lower computation of, say, , three-ciuartera of a million, one which can be well sustained by calculation, aud even then we see it is an added tax far too great for the colony to bear and prosper. Now we have a rabbit act in operation among us. It has been in operation for about 14 years.

, The avowed object of that act when passed was to etamp down tho rabbit post ; but, after being in operation for about 14 years, the rabbit peat is" more widespred. If ,nob more a;ute in any one place, it is more widespread now than it was at the time that the Rabbit Act was passed, so that we mint look upon it that the act has failed to accomplish its purpose. A. good deal might bo said here about the arbitrary and compulsory nature of the law being obnox;ous to the nature of the people, and raising up much of the fuhtable qualities of the British nature in *o whit is vory effective, even though only passive, opposition to bcins inspecfcoml and driven ; in short, tho nature* of the law and the nature of the people are unsuited to each other, and in that alone we have one big cause of the failure of the Eabbifc Act. Now the administration of thi? compulsory l.iw costs the colony a large sum of money every year. £45,085 is the last annual appropriation for tho Agricultural department, which consists very largely of the Sheep and ilabbit department. I have no means of knowing whfctler this sura inj eludes the cost of -keeping down rabbits on the j unoccupied Crown lands which keep ftlliug into the hands of the various land boards of ths colony every year as one result of the depredations of the iabbitpeßt; but if it does not then a good deal more money will havo to be added to cover the whole cost. However, just what the exact cost of administration is is not very important. The point I wish to lay before you here is that the administration of this compulsory law costs the colony a large sum of money every year. Aud then the vexatious part of it 13 that the expenditure of all this money doe* not in practice help the settlers at all to subdue ihe pest. No, it only coniDul3 the settlers to do all th3y on towards subduing the pe*t tuemselvc", and compulsion 13 not help— there isa wide difference. And now to take a fuller grasp of the subject. We see that the people of the colony aie taxing themselves to the tune of » large sum of money every year to compel ths settlers to subdue ths rabbit pest, a thing which they are totally unahle to do r without assistance. Combat the pesfc tha settler? can, and do, but subdue it under the present conditions they cannot. Aud so, Sir, I now submit to yon that it weie better by far aud wiser by far to expend the large sum of money pow being spent upon compulsion, and more too if it be necessary, in aiding and helping the settlers to subdue the pest, aud get rid of it altogether. And in my opinion this can best be accomplished by means of a certain application. of the bonus system. Now when one speaks of the bonus system to people who have not studied the subjecr, they frequently jump to the conclusion tint it means rabbit-farming— that the rabbits would be farmed for the Mike or the bonui ; but I hope to show you that it doe< not nectssarily mean that. Attain, people who have not made a study of the subject will jump to the conclusion that it niean3 the app>i_tment of a large number of Government agents throughout the coloay, whose duties would ha to count the rabbitskins aud pay a bonus of a penny a piece for them, or something like that, wi'h the ever present risk of the same skins getting presented oftener than once for paytueut of the honus. But I hopo to show you that the bonu3 system does not necessarily mean ' either of these evils. * To answer this latter objection fiiv-t, then, the place for the payment of the bonus should be the export custom houses of tha colony when the skins are being shipped away from the colony altogether, co that no danger remains of the bonus being pud oftener than once upon the samo skins. It is of course quite well known to you, Sir, that particular.* of all produce beiog exported from the colony havo to be made known at the various cus-tom houses for statistical purposes, and so all that is required respecting tin's is to authorise the custom house officers to issue bouu3 warrants at a certain rate per lb upon the weight of all rabbitskins baing exported, and it would neither he very difficult nor very expensive to have a certain amount of inspection of «kins and checking of weights tit parts of shipment previous to the issuing or the bouus warrants. The effect of this would ba to give rabbitsk'ns two valuc3 within our own borders— that is, the market value and the bonus value ; and thess two values combined should, in my opinion, bo equal ] to Is 6d per lb. That, then, is the place and J manner in which, in my opinion, the boaus should be paid. Now with respect to rabbit-farming. A great deal of rabbit-farming goes on throughout the colony.now— more by far than people who have no practical experience of tho pest are aware of. Babbits are killed down strongly and most effectually during the winter season, when the skins [ are of high nmket value. Every person is after tham then, with the result that tho rabbits di3appear veiy quickly. But when tha spring come 3 and the skins lose their value, then the rabbits are left almost alone, only such forced rabbiting being done as will keep the inspectors quiet. Aud ao during the spring and summer months rabbits are left practically alone to increase their numbers, which they do enormously, and are as numerous a? ever again when the following winter comes. And so we go on from year to year, "killing the pest down in winter when it pays to do so and allowing it to regain its lost ground every summer, and 1 submit, Sir, that we ! will myer get rid of the rabbitpest undera system like this. In fact, we grow a crop of rabbits every j summer jußt as we grow a crop of gras3 or grain. ( In order, then, to stop this rabbit-farming I which goes on now, and in order to make tho '• bonus, system preventive of, rathfer than conducive to, rabbit-farming, we should authorise the custom house officeis to issues their bouus warrants at differing rates— that is, a higher ratu of bouua upon spring aud summer skins, which aie * of low market value, and a lower rate of bonus 1 upon autumn aud winter skins, which are of high | market value, but just such a differing rate as, ; taking the market value and bonus value together, will make the total value equal to Is Gi per lb, and maintain that value all the year. ; . The effect of this would be that th* rabbiting which goe3 on so effectually .now during the winter, when the skins are valuable, would ba carried on with vigour and equal effectiveness during the summer months under this system, the skins heisg equally £a_»£-_g, and bo the

■ source of supply of the pesta gets cut off, a most important point, and instead of being allowed tini3 to regain lost ground, as now, tho pest would be a rapidly and steadily diminishing thin?, and rabbits as a past would soon be a thing of the past. But there is auother kiud of rabbit-farming winch would have to be guarded agiiusfc. I remember over 20 years ago, when rabbits fiwt becams a pc:st in So ithland, the skins' wore of high market value at the t tin's and some landholders wera found short-sighted enough to charge rabbiteri as much as £1 per week per man for ths privilege of killing rabbits on their ground. Now if we make tha skins more valuable by meaus of the bo'ius system we must not revive anything of I this kind, and in order to guard against this it • would be nec'ssary under a new rabbit lav to }>raccira'ly outlaw the rabbits, to enact tint no ; person should have any property in labbits— they would be practically "State caStle" and outlaws I with a price upon their heads. The new rabbit Maw would have to enact that no landholder should i hive the right to charge any rent, premium, or j valuable consideration of any kind for the privii lejfti of killing rabbits upon his laud. This does not propose to interfere with the ordinary rights of landed property— they would remain, precisely as now, and ho person could go trespassing on another person's land in pursuit of rabbits withoiit-^L'at--^Q___nffOJexi»issitjtt:-- Bir6' this would bs gladly glvnu. As the landholder is firat encouraged by (State aid and a differential bonus to subdue the pest, and is at th 9 sums time prevented by kw from making any profit out of the rabbits by farming them, his sola remaining interest would be to get rid of ths po«t altogether and keep his'crops mid grass for his own stock. If this system were yu,t into operation a large avmy of rabbiters, "binus-cre-ted," would at once spring into existence. They are our present unemployed and half-employed people, and many mow who cannot find employment now would ad once find work and good wages in almost any part of the country. The settlers who are now b-nng inspected and summoned and fined and forced to do a thing they are unable to do— viz., subdue the pest— would find immediate relief and holp from a wiser expenditure of the money, and the rabbiter. would themselves in thsir interests carry on a system of inspection far more efficient ) than we have now, as every ona who wanted work i and every one who wanted money would ba out ia J search of rabbits, and having found them wuiild repair to tho landholder for ths right to go there and kill thim— a right which, as every per_jn naturally follows the'r own interests, would bo only too gladly given, and only withheld for a time in such cases as growing crops of graiu or flocks of ewes at lambing time,* ' But to provide against the permission to kill rabbits being unnecessarily withheld— such cases would be about as rare bs suicides, and couJd only be attributed to the same kind of diseased feeling— but in order to guard a*ains>t the chance, give power to the sheep inspector, who will still remain, or to the police, to summon any such man before the cmrt, and give tho court power to order the admission of rabbiters on such land if it saw fit. i Another detail in the working of the system J would ba the appointment of several ivibbitftkiii j experts to appraise tho market va'ue of the skins i being shipped, and upon this v appraisement of value tho bonus would be based and paid. Thuso ' experts would only be required at the chief ports, j and such would be known as bonus pu-ts for tho purposes of this system. Cheap or free railage of skins to Mich ports should be gt anted N by the railways. It is almost unnecessary to say that the present larga and expensive staff of inspectors, agents, and sub-agents of* one kind or another would almost entirely disappear under this system of bonus, substituting a? it docs help and encouragement for compulsion and force, a few shoip inspectors only remaining. ■ And now we come to consider the big matter of what would all this cost, and in order to do so we have to look back and see what quantities of skins have beeu exported from the colonies for some year* past, and I am setting down the rajult in tabulated form for the years 1892, 1893, and JB.M (the figures for 1895 are not available yeb), and I ana giving the amount of money which would have been required to pay the bonus in each of the three yeais if thi. system had bean in force at the time. Number j V ?l" e Bonus reYew' °,f, f . rabbit - Weight ™ quired to xe "' skins ex- in lbs. ""m!? make up ported. sJj*Jhß_perlb. 1892 ...15,889,787 2,219,145 121,775 4/.CBO 17 6 1893 ...'17,041, 106 2,42'».770 138.952 42,605 15 0 189 i ...114,267,2851,983,392 87.0&3 C 0.761 8 0 Total for three i years ...47,198.1786,623,397348,720148,028 0 6 Average for three yeara .. 15,732,726 2,207,769 116,210 49,342 13 6 . The figures quoted aro obtained from official sources, and are, without doubt, fairly correct, and they appear to show that it co3ts well on for as much money to run our present compulsory system as to apply the bonus system would do, the cost of the Agricultural department, largely composed of Kabbifc Act expense, being i? 45,0£5, and the average of three years of tho bonus system £49,342. Bat even if this were wrong, the immediate ami great rise in the letting value of ?11 kind', of Grown lands freed from rabbits aa a pest would itself go far to making xip this £49,343, and perhapj do more. At first glance it may appear that under the bonus system, with greatly increased rabbiting going on, far more skins would ba produced to claim the bonus, but a moro careful study shows that thia is not so, because tho greatly increasd summer rabbiting caused by the differential rate of bonus cuts off tha scourco of supply of the rabbits— just the point aimed at. And so I submit, Sir, that less, not more, skins to claim the bonus would be the net result, and this would be apecially the case after the firat year. Indeed übbits as a pest would not bo with us after tha

second year. There would still be rabbits, but the continued operation of the honus system would keep them at a very low ebb, and they would no longer bo as now— a plague and a scourge destroying the produce of the colony. Only the practical working of the bonus syatem would show all the attendant dotaih required, so I have not gone very fully into the.de, and I may not iv every case have indicated ' just the best method of doing the necessary things. Opinions will always vary about the like of that, but what I do wish to urge upon you with all respect, and the utmost persistence too, is that there is a road in this way to make the bonus system work against, and not for, rabbit-farming, and that this road te practicable and open for us to travel ; and finally that to do so means the suppression of the rabbit pest, with all tho attendant advantages. In conclusion, I hope you will pardon me if I glance just for a moment a\ what it would mean to the olo_y to have the rabbit pest subdued. Assuming that the p»sfc costs the colony no more than £750,000 ysarly, and many careful men will estimate it much highert]yyfa4bftt^__A^ttfii*_l!^ done with that sa^awfTTionoy ? Ia yourjafciitßpseches you siy the colony maintain^aoout SO'JO unemployed men upm relief. work^u^VeH, the colony could purcluse for each of^hose men a farm of 50 acres of good land at £5 an aciv, and present ib to them frje gratis, with the value of the produce destroyed yearly by the rabbit pest. Or looking at tbe matter in another light, tha purchase of the Cheviot lilstato cost the colony £200,220. Nearly three such Cheviots could ba purchased every joar, and piesented in suitable- - Biised sections free gratis to the landless people of the colony, with the value of the produce now being destroyed yearly by tho'rabbit pest. Or to turn the matter m another airection, for in these daya of "war rumours tho defence of the colony is an important thing, the Australasian squadron, consisting of seven warships,' is maintain rd at a cost to tha confined colonies of £137,090 a year. This colony /ould maintain five such squadrons on tha earns terms— a powerful fleet of 35. such warships— with the vahw of tho produce now being destroyed yearly by the rabbit pest, and leave a trifle of £65,000 a year over to reduce taxation on the necessaries of life.— I am, &c, A. H. Chapman.